Roulette v. City of Seattle
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentPregerson, Circuit Judge
Two aspects of the majority opinion are troublesome. First, the majority requires plaintiffs mounting a First Amendment challenge to show that the challenged ordinance restricts conduct that is “integral to, or commonly associated with, expression.” Maj. at 305. Second, the majority fails to analyze Seattle’s sidewalk ordinance under traditional time, place, and manner standards.
I
Seattle’s sidewalk ordinance bans lying or sitting on sidewalks in the city’s business areas between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. SMC § 15.48.040(A).1 The sidewalk ordinance thus makes it illegal for people…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ward v. Rock Against RacismSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Haguer v. Committee for Industrial OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for VincentSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.