X hits on this document

PDF document

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - page 11 / 14

30 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

11 / 14

Case 6:06-cv-01583-GAP-KRS

Document 88

Filed 09/26/2008

Page 11 of 14

Amendment freedoms – already provide protection for the public. In short, whatever problems

may exist, this Ordinance does nothing but move them around to be shared by other parks.

Rather than address the problem of homelessness in these downtown neighborhoods

directly, the City has instead decided to limit the expressive activity which attracts the homeless to

these neighborhoods. While the Ordinance may very well accomplish the goal of diminishing the

number of homeless in the Thornton Park and Lake Eola neighborhoods, the restriction clearly

prevents OFNB from communicating its Constitutionally protected speech at a meaningful

location which, from time immemorial, has been the traditional public forum for free speech.

Although some incidental restrictions on First Amendment freedoms must be tolerated, the Court

concludes that the restriction here goes too far.

In sum, there is no evidence that the Ordinance furthers a substantial governmental interest.

Even assuming that the Ordinance did further a substantial governmental interest, the restrictions

placed on First Amendment freedoms are much greater than that which are essential. Accordingly,

the Ordinance violates Plaintiffs’ right to free speech under the First Amendment.

  • -

    11-

Document info
Document views30
Page views30
Page last viewedSat Oct 29 00:32:17 UTC 2016
Pages14
Paragraphs328
Words4310

Comments