Can't Protect Itself
American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, News Release
July 23, 2007
ACLU Says Radford Sign Ordinance Violates First Amendment Rights of University Students
Letter to City Attorney Demands Immediate Repeal of New Measure
Radford, VA—The ACLU of Virginia faxed a letter last Friday to Radford City Attorney Jim H. Guynn, Jr. threatening to file a lawsuit if the city does not take immediate action to repeal a sign ordinance imposing greater restrictions on property occupied by Radford University student organizations than other kinds of property.
As of this morning, the ACLU had not received a response from the City.
“Just about everything you can imagine is wrong with this ordinance,” said ACLU of Virginia Executive Director Kent Willis. “It could be used as a primer on how to violate constitutional rights. It infringes on free speech. It discriminates against a particular group of individuals. And as regards flags and temporary signs, it gives city and the college officials total authority to arbitrarily decide who gets them, and who doesn’t.”
Approved by Radford City Council in May, Section 120-239 of the Radford City Code prohibits student organizations from posting signs of any type except temporary signs announcing special events. Signs for special events are permitted, but only after receiving approval from Radford University’s Department of Student Activities and the City of Radford Zoning Administrator.
The regulation also imposes special size limits on flags student organizations may wish to fly and requires prior approval for such flags from the same University and City officials who must approve signs for special events.
Although sign regulations in Radford, like most municipalities, vary depending on how areas are zoned, only student groups are subject to the new restrictions. At least some student organizations are located in the Central Business District, where very few sign restrictions apply to non-student properties. The student group that contacted the ACLU of Virginia last week to complain about the ordinance is located in the Central Business District.
A copy of the letter from ACLU of Virginia Legal Director Rebecca K. Glenberg to the Radford City Attorney follows.
Contacts: Kent Willis and Rebecca Glenberg, 804/644-8022
July 19, 2007
VIA FACSIMILE (540-389-2350) AND REGULAR MAIL
Jim H. Guynn, Jr.
Radford City Attorney
Guynn, Memmer & Dillon, P.C.
415 S. College Avenue
Salem, Virginia 24153
Mr. Guynn:
I write regarding Section 120-239 of the Radford City Code, which imposes special restrictions on signs posted by Radford University student clubs and organizations. This section of the code is patently unconstitutional, and I ask that you advise your client, the City of Radford, to repeal it at once.
The ordinance prohibits student organizations from posting any signs other than for special events “identified and agreed upon between the Department of Student Activities and the Zoning Administrator.” All such temporary signs must receive prior approval from both the University and the Zoning Administrator. The ordinance also imposes special size limitations on student organization flags, and requires that all flags receive prior approval by the University and the Zoning Administrator.
While municipalities are free to impose reasonable and neutral regulations upon the time, place and manner of signs, restrictions that discriminate against particular messages or speakers presumptively violate the First Amendment. Such restrictions may be imposed only when they are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. See Boos v. Barry,485 U.S. 312 (1988). Here, it is not clear that the City has any interest in regulating the signs of student organizations more stringently than other signs, much less a compelling one.
The ordinance is also unconstitutional for the separate reason that students must obtain government approval before displaying signs and flags. Such “prior restraints” are one of the chief evils the First Amendment was meant to prohibit, and are only permissible in extraordinary circumstances. Any system of prior restraint must include clear, content-neutral standards in order to constrain the discretion of the licensor, City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., 486 U.S. 750 (1988), as well as comprehensive procedural protections, such as prompt judicial review. Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51 (1965). In this case, no such protections exist, and the University or the Zoning Administrator is free to deny permission for a sign or flag for any reason or no reason at all. This unbridled discretion is fundamentally at odds with First Amendment norms.
Accordingly, I ask that the City take immediate steps to repeal this unconstitutional ordinance. Should the ordinance remain in force, the ACLU of Virginia will not hesitate to file suit against the City on behalf of appropriate plaintiffs.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (804) 644-8022.
Sincerely,
Rebecca K. Glenberg
Legal Director