Supreme Court Allows Civil Rights Challenge to City's Protest Ordinance to Move Forward
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion relating to a challenge to a City ordinance that required individuals participating in protests to stay within a "designated protest area" in Olivier v. City of Brandon.
Olivier was a street preacher in Mississippi who often shared his religious views on City sidewalks. In 2019, the City adopted an ordinance requiring anyone participating in protests or demonstrations to stay within a designated protest area. Olivier was arrested for violating the ordinance and pled no contest and was fined, given one year of probation, and a suspended 10 day prison sentence that would be served only if he violated the ordinance during his probation period. Although he did not appeal the fine or sentence, he did file a section 1983 civil rights lawsuit against the City to challenge the constitutionality of the ordinance. Specifically, he argued that the ordinance violated the First Amendment's free speech clause because it confined speakers to a designated protest area, and he sought an injunction prohibiting the City from enforcing the ordinance against him in the future. The district court and court of appeals dismissed his case based on an earlier U.S. Supreme Court decision that prohibits the use of the section 1983 to challenge the validity of a prior conviction or sentence.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the lower courts, and reversed their decision, allowing Olivier's lawsuit to move forward. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that Olivier was not challenging the validity of his conviction or sentence. Instead, he was seeking relief from future prosecutions for violations of the ordinance, so its prior decision barring 1983 relief did not apply. The Court did not weigh in on the question of whether the ordinance was constitutional or not, remanding it back to the district court to make that determination.
0 comments:
Post a Comment