Legal Opinion

City of Bellevue v. Lorang

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided August 31, 1998No. 38975-1-IPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEllington, J.

Jon Marc Lorang was convicted of telephone harassment under Bellevue City Code (BCC) 10A.84.090. We granted his petition for discretionary review to consider whether the ordinance violates the free speech provisions of the federal or state constitutions by seeking to prohibit the use of “profane” language. Mr. Lorang contends that the term “profane” has antireligious connotations and that the ordinance’s ban is therefore viewpoint-based. We construe the word “profane” in its secular sense and conclude the Bellevue ordinance is facially constitutional. To ensure that the antireligious meaning…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. R. A. v. v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Gooding v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. State v. GuloyWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State v. EasterWashington Supreme Court · 1996

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Bellevue v. LorangWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. City of Bellevue v. LorangWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Hunter v. University of WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  4. Hunter v. University of WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  5. City of Redmond v. BurkhartCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API