作者:托丽·基

The 2020 presidential election brought a fresh wave of 政治 signage to cities, including signs that contain profanity and partisan language. 两年多以后, many cities continue to receive complaints about signs that contain swear words, 尤其是在学校附近, 繁忙的城市道路, and on bus routes — leaving city officials asking how they can address the issue.

第一修正案的保护

The First Amendment protects signs as speech; as a result, courts 关闭ly review attempts to regulate signs. 2015年，最高法院判决里德诉. 吉尔伯特镇, which has since become the pivotal case in determining the validity of sign ordinances.

在里德, courts now presume that sign ordinances which restrict speech — expressly or implicitly — are unconstitutional. 在进行此分析之前, courts will look at the effect of the sign ordinance to determine whether it regulates signs differently based on the content or message expressed in the sign. If the court finds that the ordinance restricts the speech based on the content, it will apply the strict content-based standard to review the challenged ordinance. If the sign ordinance does not regulate the message or content of a sign, courts will apply the less strict content-neutral standard in its analysis.

Courts generally uphold sign ordinances that are content-neutral and further a significant government interest. 因此, cities should avoid implementing regulations that prohibit signs based on their content or message. So, what can cities do when it comes to signs and flags?

Number, size, and placement of non-commercial signs

Cities may not regulate the signs and flags based on subjective standards — including campaign signs — for safety or aesthetic reasons. Cities may regulate the manner in which signs and flags are displayed, 基于客观标准，比如尺寸, 位置, 标志数量, 等. 然而, cities cannot discriminately regulate signs based on the subject matter discussed or message expressed.

Cities should keep in mind the three things that courts analyze when determining if city regulations infringe upon free speech:

• 位置: Where speech occurs, focusing on public property.
• 内容:表达的观点.
• 内容中立: Neutral interpretation of the expressed message that does not show disapproval for specific types of messages.

明尼苏达州的政治标语

During election season, cities may not enforce any size and number regulations of signs. 明尼苏达州法规，第211b条.045 requires cities to allow noncommercial signs of any size or number during election season, from 46 days before the state general primary until 10 days after the state general election, 不管当地的法令. 然而, this law does not give cities the authority to prohibit 政治 signs during other parts of the year. 在选举季节之外, 适用城市的标志条例, but campaign signs may still be posted outside of the parameters listed above at any time during the year as long as they abide by the number and size restrictions in the ordinance.

标志中的亵渎

Community members tend to be particularly upset by signs on private property that contain profanity, and cities question whether such language is considered obscene and can be regulated.

Obscenities can be regulated in specific contexts, but the definition of obscene content is limited. 明尼苏达州法规，第617条.241将淫秽定义为“工作”, 作为一个整体, [that] appeals to the prurient interest in sex and depicts or describes in a patently 进攻 manner sexual conduct and which, 作为一个整体, 有没有严肃的文学, 艺术, 政治, 或者科学价值.“一般来说, 脏话不被认为是淫秽的, in fact the Supreme Court has noted that language may be indecent, 进攻, 粗俗的, and profane but not reach the level of obscenity.

因此, 即使一个标志或旗帜含有亵渎, it is most likely protected speech under the First Amendment.

法规的替代方案

Many complaints about signs deal with the language used in the expression and not as much about the message. Citizens can be encouraged to have open and honest conversations with their neighbors about the effect profanity and other messages has on them.

Many citizens express concerns about the effect such profanity has on their children. Citizens can use it as an opportunity to teach their children about the First Amendment right to free speech and a lesson on what is considered appropriate language in their household. Parents and other adults can lead by example by expressing their opinions through less controversial signs or by ignoring signs they find 进攻 all together.

Because First Amendment issues are very fact specific, the city should work with its city attorney to review the city’s sign ordinance and determine its options. 从LMC信息备忘录中了解更多信息 selenaumbrella.net/signs.

Tori Kee is staff attorney with the 明尼苏达城市联盟. 联系人: tkee@selenaumbrella.net or (651) 281-1292