Legal Opinion · Dissent

Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King County

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 18, 2015No. 11-35914, 11-35931Published

1DissentChristen, Circuit Judge

The majority and I part ways at the starting line. In my view, the district court erred by concluding that King County created only a limited public forum. The County’s policy and practice unmistakably demonstrate an intent to create a designated public forum on its Metro bus exteriors. Accordingly, the First Amendment requires that the County’s decision to restrict SeaMAC’s speech must be necessary to serve a compelling state interest and narrowly drawn; in other words, it must survive strict scrutiny. This is not to pre-judge the outcome of the case. The safety of public transit systems is…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sammartano v. First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Carson CityCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
  2. Planned Parenthood Association/chicago Area, an Illinois Not-For-Profit Corporation v. Chicago Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  3. Children of the Rosary v. City of PhoenixCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  4. Christ's Bride Ministries, Inc. v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Transportation Display's IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
  5. Michael A. Lebron v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984

9 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