United States Ninth Circuit

In plaintiff's suit against a city and various city officials, challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance that makes it a misdemeanor for members of the public who speak at a city council meetings to engage in "disorderly, insolent, or disruptive behavior," the judgment of the district court is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) section 2-61 is facially overbroad and therefore invalid; 2) since the word "insolent" is easily removed from the ordinance without detriment to the purpose of section 2-61, it need not be wholly invalidated because it was properly applied to plaintiff's disruptive behavior; and 3) the district court did not commit reversible error as to plaintiff's remaining claims where the evidence amply supported the jury's verdict that he caused an actual disruption of the city council meeting.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/05/2012
• Published 09/05/2012

Judges

• Tallman

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel