city
council
taxpayers
vincent
argued
october
decided
may
section
los
angeles
municipal
code
prohibits
posting
signs
public
property
appellee
taxpayers
vincent
group
supporters
candidate
election
los
angeles
city
council
entered
contract
appellee
candidates
outdoor
graphics
service
cogs
fabricate
post
signs
candidate
name
cogs
produced
cardboard
signs
attached
utility
pole
crosswires
various
locations
acting
city
employees
routinely
removed
posters
including
cogs
signs
attached
utility
poles
similar
objects
covered
ordinance
appellees
filed
suit
federal
district
appellants
city
various
city
officials
hereafter
city
alleging
abridged
appellees
freedom
speech
within
meaning
first
amendment
seeking
damages
injunctive
relief
district
entered
findings
fact
concluded
constitutional
granted
city
motion
summary
judgment
appeals
reversed
reasoning
ordinance
presumptively
unconstitutional
significant
first
amendment
interests
involved
city
justified
total
ban
signs
basis
asserted
interests
preventing
visual
clutter
minimizing
traffic
hazards
preventing
interference
intended
use
public
property
held
overbreadth
doctrine
applicable
nothing
record
indicate
different
impact
third
parties
interests
free
speech
appellees
interests
appellees
failed
identify
significant
difference
claim
invalid
overbreadth
grounds
claim
unconstitutional
applied
signs
political
campaign
thus
inappropriate
entertain
overbreadth
challenge
pp
section
unconstitutional
applied
appellees
expressive
activity
pp
general
principle
first
amendment
forbids
government
regulate
speech
ways
favor
viewpoints
ideas
expense
others
applicable
section
text
neutral
indeed
silent
concerning
speaker
point
view
district
findings
indicate
applied
appellees
others
evenhanded
manner
within
city
constitutional
power
attempt
improve
appearance
interest
basically
unrelated
suppression
ideas
cf
pp
municipalities
weighty
essentially
esthetic
interest
proscribing
intrusive
unpleasant
formats
expression
problem
addressed
visual
assault
citizens
los
angeles
presented
accumulation
signs
posted
public
property
constitutes
significant
substantive
evil
within
city
power
prohibit
metromedia
san
diego
pp
section
curtails
speech
necessary
accomplish
purpose
eliminating
visual
clutter
banning
posted
signs
city
eliminate
exact
source
evil
sought
remedy
rationale
schneider
state
held
ordinances
absolutely
prohibited
handbilling
public
streets
sidewalks
invalid
inapposite
context
instant
case
pp
validity
city
esthetic
interest
elimination
signs
public
property
compromised
failing
extend
ban
private
property
private
citizen
interest
controlling
use
property
justifies
disparate
treatment
predicate
district
findings
conclusion
prohibition
posting
appellees
signs
fails
advance
city
esthetic
interest
pp
restriction
expressive
activity
may
invalid
remaining
modes
communication
inadequate
affect
individual
freedom
exercise
right
speak
distribute
literature
place
posting
signs
public
property
prohibited
district
findings
indicate
ample
alternative
modes
communication
los
angeles
merit
appellees
suggestion
property
covered
either
public
forum
subject
special
first
amendment
protection
least
treated
respect
public
forum
property
located
mere
fact
government
property
used
vehicle
communication
use
lampposts
signposts
mean
constitution
requires
use
permitted
public
property
tradition
designation
forum
public
communication
may
reserved
government
intended
purposes
communicative
otherwise
regulation
speech
reasonable
effort
suppress
expression
merely
public
officials
oppose
speaker
view
pp
although
plausible
policy
arguments
might
well
made
support
appellees
suggestion
city
written
ordinance
less
severe
effect
expressive
activity
like
providing
exception
political
campaign
signs
follow
exception
constitutionally
mandated
clear
suggested
exceptions
even
constitutionally
permissible
create
exception
appellees
political
speech
types
protected
speech
might
create
risk
engaging
constitutionally
forbidden
content
discrimination
city
may
properly
decide
esthetic
interest
avoiding
visual
clutter
justifies
removal
signs
creating
increasing
clutter
pp
stevens
delivered
opinion
burger
white
powell
rehnquist
joined
brennan
filed
dissenting
opinion
marshall
blackmun
joined
post
anthony
saul
alperin
argued
cause
appellants
briefs
ira
reiner
gary
netzer
wayne
canterbury
argued
cause
filed
brief
appellees
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
city
antioch
william
galstan
national
institute
municipal
law
officers
lamar
shelley
john
witt
henry
underhill
benjamin
brown
roy
bates
james
brennan
roger
cutler
clifford
pierce
walter
powell
frederick
schwarz
william
taube
william
thornton
max
zall
charles
rhyne
brief
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
alan
schlosser
amitai
schwartz
fred
okrand
neil
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
justice
stevens
delivered
opinion
section
los
angeles
municipal
code
prohibits
posting
signs
public
property
question
presented
whether
prohibition
abridges
appellees
freedom
speech
within
meaning
first
amendment
march
roland
vincent
candidate
election
los
angeles
city
council
group
supporters
known
taxpayers
vincent
taxpayers
entered
contract
political
sign
service
company
known
candidates
outdoor
graphics
service
cogs
fabricate
post
signs
vincent
name
cogs
produced
cardboard
signs
attached
utility
poles
various
locations
draping
crosswires
support
poles
stapling
cardboard
together
bottom
signs
message
roland
vincent
city
council
acting
authority
municipal
code
employees
city
bureau
street
maintenance
routinely
removed
posters
attached
utility
poles
similar
objects
covered
ordinance
including
cogs
signs
weekly
sign
removal
report
covering
period
march
indicated
among
signs
removed
public
property
week
identified
roland
vincent
signs
signs
identified
report
apparently
commercial
character
march
taxpayers
cogs
filed
action
district
central
district
california
naming
city
director
bureau
street
maintenance
members
city
council
defendants
sought
injunction
enforcement
ordinance
well
compensatory
punitive
damages
engaging
discovery
parties
filed
summary
judgment
issue
liability
district
entered
findings
fact
concluded
ordinance
constitutional
granted
city
motion
district
findings
purport
resolve
disputed
issue
fact
instead
summarize
material
record
appears
uncontroverted
findings
recite
principal
responsibility
locating
removing
signs
handbills
posted
violation
assigned
street
use
inspection
division
city
bureau
street
maintenance
found
political
nonpolitical
signs
illegally
posted
removed
without
regard
content
explaining
purposes
city
zoning
code
enacted
noting
prohibition
furthered
purposes
district
found
large
number
illegally
posted
signs
constitute
clutter
visual
blight
specific
reference
posting
cogs
signs
utility
pole
crosswires
district
found
posting
add
somewhat
blight
inevitably
encourage
greatly
increased
posting
unauthorized
unsightly
places
addition
district
found
placing
signs
utility
poles
creates
potential
safety
hazard
violations
block
views
otherwise
cause
traffic
hazards
finally
district
concluded
sign
prohibition
prevent
taxpayers
cogs
exercising
free
speech
rights
public
streets
public
places
remain
free
picket
parade
distribute
handbills
carry
signs
post
signs
handbills
automobiles
private
property
permission
owners
thereof
conclusions
law
district
characterized
esthetic
economic
interests
improving
beauty
city
eliminating
clutter
visual
blight
legitimate
compelling
interests
together
interest
protecting
safety
workmen
must
scale
utility
poles
interest
eliminating
traffic
hazards
adequately
supported
sign
prohibition
reasonable
regulation
affecting
time
place
manner
expression
appeals
question
district
findings
fact
rejected
conclusions
law
appeals
reasoned
ordinance
presumptively
unconstitutional
significant
first
amendment
interests
involved
noted
city
advanced
three
separate
justifications
ordinance
concluded
none
sufficient
appeals
held
city
failed
make
sufficient
showing
asserted
interests
esthetics
preventing
visual
clutter
substantial
offered
demonstrate
city
engaged
comprehensive
effort
remove
contributions
unattractive
environment
commercial
industrial
areas
city
interest
minimizing
traffic
hazards
rejected
readily
apparent
substantial
traffic
problems
result
permitting
posting
certain
kinds
signs
many
publicly
owned
objects
covered
ordinance
finally
acknowledging
flat
prohibition
signs
certain
objects
fire
hydrants
traffic
signals
permissible
method
preventing
interference
intended
use
public
property
regulation
size
design
construction
posters
method
removing
might
reasonable
appeals
concluded
city
justified
total
ban
appeal
city
challenges
appeals
holding
unconstitutional
face
taxpayers
cogs
defend
holding
also
contend
ordinance
unconstitutional
applied
posting
political
campaign
signs
crosswires
utility
poles
two
quite
different
ways
statute
ordinance
may
considered
invalid
face
either
unconstitutional
every
conceivable
application
seeks
prohibit
broad
range
protected
conduct
unconstitutionally
overbroad
shall
analyze
facial
challenges
ordinance
address
specific
application
appellees
seminal
cases
held
state
legislation
unconstitutional
face
involve
departure
general
rule
litigant
standing
vindicate
constitutional
rights
stromberg
california
lovell
griffin
statutes
unconstitutional
applied
defendants
conduct
also
unconstitutional
face
apparent
attempt
enforce
legislation
create
unacceptable
risk
suppression
ideas
cases
character
holding
facial
invalidity
expresses
conclusion
statute
never
applied
valid
manner
holdings
invalidated
entire
statutes
create
exception
general
rule
constitutional
adjudication
requires
review
application
statute
conduct
party
subsequently
however
recognize
exception
general
rule
laws
written
broadly
may
inhibit
constitutionally
protected
speech
third
parties
overbreadth
doctrine
source
thornhill
alabama
case
concluded
existence
broadly
written
statutes
may
deterrent
effect
free
expression
subject
challenge
even
party
whose
conduct
may
unprotected
repeatedly
held
statute
may
challenged
face
even
though
narrowly
drawn
statute
valid
applied
party
case
exception
general
rule
predicated
judicial
prediction
assumption
statute
existence
may
cause
others
refrain
constitutionally
protected
speech
expression
broadrick
oklahoma
development
overbreadth
doctrine
sensitive
risk
doctrine
might
sweep
broadly
exception
ordinary
standing
requirements
swallow
general
rule
order
decide
whether
overbreadth
exception
applicable
particular
case
weighed
likelihood
statute
existence
inhibit
free
expression
comes
point
effect
best
prediction
confidence
justify
invalidating
statute
face
prohibiting
state
enforcing
statute
conduct
admittedly
within
power
proscribe
put
matter
another
way
particularly
conduct
merely
speech
involved
believe
overbreadth
statute
must
real
substantial
well
judged
relation
statute
plainly
legitimate
sweep
broadrick
oklahoma
citation
omitted
requirement
substantial
overbreadth
directly
derived
purpose
nature
doctrine
sweeping
statute
one
incapable
limitation
potential
repeatedly
chill
exercise
expressive
activity
many
individuals
extent
deterrence
protected
speech
expected
decrease
declining
reach
regulation
new
york
ferber
omitted
appeals
concluded
ordinance
vulnerable
overbreadth
challenge
overinclusive
response
traffic
concerns
least
drastic
means
preventing
interference
normal
use
public
property
conclusion
rested
evaluation
assumed
effect
ordinance
third
parties
rather
specific
consideration
impact
ordinance
parties
however
appropriate
case
entertain
facial
challenge
based
overbreadth
found
nothing
record
indicate
ordinance
different
impact
third
parties
interests
free
speech
taxpayers
cogs
taxpayers
cogs
apparently
agree
prohibition
posting
signs
publicly
owned
objects
mentioned
ordinance
perfectly
reasonable
thus
dispute
city
power
proscribe
attachment
handbill
sign
sidewalk
crosswalk
curb
lamppost
hydrant
lifesaving
equipment
position
respect
utility
poles
entirely
clear
contend
unconstitutional
prohibit
attachment
cardboard
signs
horizontal
crosswires
supporting
utility
poles
political
campaign
short
failed
identify
significant
difference
claim
ordinance
invalid
overbreadth
grounds
claim
unconstitutional
applied
political
signs
specifically
taxpayers
cogs
attempted
demonstrate
ordinance
applies
conduct
likely
protected
first
amendment
crosswire
signs
indeed
record
suggests
many
signs
posted
violation
ordinance
posted
way
may
create
safety
traffic
problems
cogs
tried
avoid
accordingly
record
appears
ordinance
may
validly
applied
cogs
validly
applied
signs
parties
appellees
simply
failed
demonstrate
realistic
danger
ordinance
significantly
compromise
recognized
first
amendment
protections
individuals
therefore
inappropriate
case
entertain
overbreadth
challenge
ordinance
taxpayers
cogs
argue
generally
city
interest
eliminating
visual
blight
sufficiently
weighty
justify
abridgment
speech
interest
ordinance
advanced
argument
analogous
facial
challenges
involved
cases
like
stromberg
lovell
previously
observed
appellees
acknowledge
ordinance
serves
safety
interests
many
applications
hence
argue
ordinance
never
validly
applied
instead
appellees
argue
placed
signs
locations
esthetic
interest
implicated
addition
argue
developed
expertise
placing
signs
offensive
manners
alienate
clientele
constituencies
emphasize
special
value
free
communication
political
campaigns
see
metromedia
san
diego
stevens
dissenting
part
rehnquist
dissenting
light
arguments
appellees
attack
ordinance
basically
challenge
ordinance
applied
activities
therefore
limit
analysis
constitutionality
ordinance
concrete
case
us
turn
arguments
invalid
applied
expressive
activity
taxpayers
cogs
ii
ordinance
prohibits
appellees
communicating
public
certain
manner
presumably
diminishes
total
quantity
communication
city
application
ordinance
appellees
expressive
activities
surely
raises
question
whether
ordinance
abridges
freedom
speech
within
meaning
first
amendment
appellees
certainly
standing
challenge
application
ordinance
expressive
activities
say
ordinance
presents
first
amendment
issue
necessarily
say
constitutes
first
amendment
violation
metromedia
san
diego
burger
dissenting
clear
since
earliest
decisions
concerning
freedom
speech
state
may
sometimes
curtail
speech
necessary
advance
significant
legitimate
state
interest
schenck
stromberg
lovell
demonstrate
purported
interests
desire
suppress
support
minority
party
unpopular
cause
exclude
expression
certain
points
view
marketplace
ideas
plainly
illegitimate
immediately
invalidate
rule
general
principle
emerged
line
cases
first
amendment
forbids
government
regulate
speech
ways
favor
viewpoints
ideas
expense
others
see
bolger
youngs
drug
products
consolidated
edison
public
service
carey
brown
young
american
mini
theatres
plurality
opinion
police
department
chicago
mosley
general
rule
application
case
even
hint
bias
censorship
city
enactment
enforcement
ordinance
claim
ordinance
designed
suppress
certain
ideas
city
finds
distasteful
applied
appellees
views
express
text
ordinance
neutral
indeed
silent
concerning
speaker
point
view
district
findings
indicate
applied
appellees
others
evenhanded
manner
set
forth
appropriate
framework
reviewing
regulation
kind
government
regulation
sufficiently
justified
within
constitutional
power
government
furthers
important
substantial
governmental
interest
governmental
interest
unrelated
suppression
free
expression
incidental
restriction
alleged
first
amendment
freedoms
greater
essential
furtherance
interest
case
taxpayers
cogs
dispute
within
constitutional
power
city
attempt
improve
appearance
interest
basically
unrelated
suppression
ideas
therefore
critical
inquiries
whether
interest
sufficiently
substantial
justify
effect
ordinance
appellees
expression
whether
effect
greater
necessary
accomplish
city
purpose
iii
kovacs
cooper
rejected
notion
city
powerless
protect
citizens
unwanted
exposure
certain
methods
expression
may
legitimately
deemed
public
nuisance
upholding
ordinance
prohibited
loud
raucous
sound
trucks
held
state
substantial
interest
protecting
citizens
unwelcome
noise
lehman
city
shaker
heights
upheld
city
prohibition
political
advertising
buses
stating
city
entitled
protect
unwilling
viewers
intrusive
advertising
may
interfere
city
goal
making
buses
rapid
convenient
pleasant
inexpensive
plurality
opinion
see
also
douglas
concurring
judgment
erznoznik
city
jacksonville
cases
indicate
municipalities
weighty
essentially
esthetic
interest
proscribing
intrusive
unpleasant
formats
expression
metromedia
san
diego
supra
dealt
san
diego
prohibition
certain
forms
outdoor
billboards
considered
city
interest
avoiding
visual
clutter
seven
justices
explicitly
concluded
interest
sufficient
justify
prohibition
billboards
see
opinion
white
joined
stewart
marshall
powell
jj
stevens
dissenting
part
burger
dissenting
rehnquist
dissenting
justice
white
writing
plurality
expressly
concluded
city
esthetic
interests
sufficiently
substantial
provide
acceptable
justification
prohibition
use
billboards
san
diego
interest
appearance
undoubtedly
substantial
governmental
goal
reaffirm
conclusion
majority
metromedia
problem
addressed
ordinance
visual
assault
citizens
los
angeles
presented
accumulation
signs
posted
public
property
constitutes
significant
substantive
evil
within
city
power
prohibit
city
interest
attempting
preserve
improve
quality
urban
life
one
must
accorded
high
respect
young
american
mini
theatres
plurality
opinion
iv
turn
question
whether
scope
restriction
appellees
expressive
activity
substantially
broader
necessary
protect
city
interest
eliminating
visual
clutter
incidental
restriction
expression
results
city
attempt
accomplish
purpose
considered
justified
reasonable
regulation
time
place
manner
expression
narrowly
tailored
serve
interest
see
heffron
international
society
krishna
consciousness
schad
mount
ephraim
carey
brown
grayned
city
rockford
police
department
chicago
mosley
district
found
signs
prohibited
ordinance
constitute
visual
clutter
blight
banning
signs
city
eliminate
exact
source
evil
sought
remedy
plurality
wrote
metromedia
speculative
recognize
nature
wherever
located
however
constructed
perceived
esthetic
harm
true
posted
signs
true
esthetic
interest
preventing
kind
litter
may
result
distribution
leaflets
public
streets
sidewalks
support
prophylactic
prohibition
citizen
exercise
method
expressing
views
schneider
state
held
ordinances
absolutely
prohibited
handbilling
streets
invalid
explained
cities
adequately
protect
esthetic
interest
avoiding
litter
without
abridging
protected
expression
merely
penalizing
actually
litter
see
taxpayers
contend
interest
supporting
vincent
political
campaign
affords
constitutional
right
distribute
brochures
leaflets
public
streets
los
angeles
provides
equal
support
asserted
right
post
temporary
signs
objects
adjacent
streets
sidewalks
argue
mere
fact
temporary
signs
add
somewhat
city
visual
clutter
entitled
weight
temporary
unsightliness
discarded
handbills
additional
burden
insufficient
justify
ordinances
reviewed
schneider
rationale
schneider
inapposite
context
instant
case
individual
citizens
actively
exercising
right
communicate
directly
potential
recipients
message
conduct
continued
speakers
distributors
remained
scene
case
appellees
posted
dozens
temporary
signs
throughout
area
remain
unattended
removed
expressly
noted
schneider
first
amendment
deprive
municipality
power
enact
regulations
throwing
literature
broadcast
streets
prohibition
conduct
abridge
constitutional
liberty
since
activity
bears
necessary
relationship
freedom
speak
write
print
distribute
information
opinion
short
constitutional
impediment
punishment
actually
throw
papers
streets
distributor
leaflets
right
simply
scatter
pamphlets
air
toss
large
quantities
paper
window
tall
building
low
flying
airplane
characterizing
activity
separate
means
communication
diminish
state
power
condemn
public
nuisance
right
recognized
schneider
tender
written
material
passerby
may
reject
accept
thereafter
may
keep
dispose
properly
incur
risk
punishment
lets
fall
ground
one
rightfully
street
open
public
carries
elsewhere
constitutional
right
express
views
orderly
fashion
right
extends
communication
ideas
handbills
literature
well
spoken
word
jamison
texas
see
also
cox
louisiana
black
dissenting
part
respect
signs
posted
appellees
however
tangible
medium
expressing
message
adverse
impact
appearance
landscape
schneider
antilittering
statute
addressed
substantive
evil
without
prohibiting
expressive
activity
whereas
application
prophylactic
rule
actually
employed
gratuitously
infringed
upon
right
individual
communicate
directly
willing
listener
substantive
evil
visual
blight
merely
possible
byproduct
activity
created
medium
expression
contrast
schneider
therefore
application
ordinance
case
responds
precisely
substantive
problem
legitimately
concerns
city
ordinance
curtails
speech
necessary
accomplish
purpose
appeals
accepted
argument
prohibition
use
unattractive
signs
justified
esthetic
grounds
fails
apply
equally
unattractive
signs
wherever
might
located
comparable
argument
categorically
rejected
metromedia
case
argued
city
simultaneously
permit
billboards
used
onsite
advertising
also
justify
prohibition
offsite
advertising
esthetic
grounds
since
types
advertising
equally
unattractive
held
however
city
reasonably
conclude
esthetic
interest
outweighed
countervailing
interest
one
kind
advertising
even
though
outweighed
validity
esthetic
interest
elimination
signs
public
property
compromised
failing
extend
ban
private
property
private
citizen
interest
controlling
use
property
justifies
disparate
treatment
moreover
extending
ban
locations
significant
opportunity
communicate
means
temporary
signs
preserved
private
property
owners
esthetic
concerns
keep
posting
signs
property
within
reasonable
bounds
even
visual
blight
remains
partial
ban
may
nevertheless
enhance
city
appearance
furthermore
finding
area
appellees
seek
place
signs
already
many
signs
posted
adjacent
private
property
elimination
appellees
signs
inconsequential
effect
esthetic
values
city
concerned
simply
predicate
findings
district
conclusion
prohibition
posting
appellees
signs
fails
advance
city
esthetic
interest
vi
first
amendment
guarantee
right
employ
every
conceivable
method
communication
times
places
heffron
international
society
krishna
consciousness
restriction
expressive
activity
may
invalid
remaining
modes
communication
inadequate
see
grace
heffron
international
society
krishna
consciousness
consolidated
edison
public
service
linmark
associates
willingboro
los
angeles
ordinance
affect
individual
freedom
exercise
right
speak
distribute
literature
place
posting
signs
public
property
prohibited
extent
posting
signs
public
property
advantages
forms
expression
see
talley
california
reason
believe
advantages
obtained
means
contrary
findings
district
indicate
ample
alternative
modes
communication
los
angeles
notwithstanding
appellees
general
assertions
brief
concerning
utility
political
posters
nothing
findings
indicates
posting
political
posters
public
property
uniquely
valuable
important
mode
communication
appellees
ability
communicate
effectively
threatened
restrictions
expression
vii
appellees
suggest
public
property
covered
ordinance
either
public
forum
first
amendment
purposes
least
treated
respect
public
forum
property
located
traditional
public
forum
property
occupies
special
position
terms
first
amendment
protection
grace
appellees
maintain
activities
entitled
protection
hague
cio
opinion
roberts
recognized
wherever
title
streets
parks
may
rest
immemorially
held
trust
use
public
time
mind
used
purposes
assembly
communicating
thoughts
citizens
discussing
public
questions
use
streets
public
places
ancient
times
part
privileges
immunities
rights
liberties
citizens
privilege
citizen
use
streets
parks
communication
views
national
questions
may
regulated
interest
absolute
relative
must
exercised
subordination
general
comfort
convenience
consonance
peace
good
order
must
guise
regulation
abridged
denied
appellees
reliance
public
forum
doctrine
misplaced
fail
demonstrate
existence
traditional
right
access
respecting
items
utility
poles
purposes
communication
comparable
recognized
public
streets
parks
clear
first
amendment
guarantee
access
government
property
simply
owned
controlled
government
postal
service
greenburgh
civic
rather
existence
right
access
public
property
standard
limitations
upon
right
must
evaluated
differ
depending
character
property
issue
perry
education
assn
perry
local
educators
lampposts
course
used
signposts
mere
fact
government
property
used
vehicle
communication
mean
constitution
requires
uses
permitted
cf
postal
service
greenburgh
civic
public
property
tradition
designation
forum
public
communication
may
reserved
state
intended
purposes
communicative
otherwise
long
regulation
speech
reasonable
effort
suppress
expression
merely
public
officials
oppose
speaker
view
perry
education
assn
perry
local
educators
given
analysis
legitimate
interest
served
ordinance
viewpoint
neutrality
availability
alternative
channels
communication
ordinance
certainly
constitutional
applied
appellees
standard
viii
finally
taxpayers
cogs
argue
los
angeles
written
ordinance
less
severe
effect
expressive
activity
permitting
posting
kind
sign
time
types
public
property
making
variety
specific
exceptions
ordinance
signs
carrying
certain
types
messages
political
campaign
signs
signs
posted
specific
time
periods
perhaps
political
campaigns
particular
locations
perhaps
areas
already
cluttered
excessive
number
signs
adjacent
private
property
signs
meeting
design
specifications
size
color
plausible
public
policy
arguments
might
well
made
support
exception
means
follows
therefore
constitutionally
mandated
cf
singer
clear
suggested
exceptions
even
constitutionally
permissible
example
even
though
political
speech
entitled
fullest
possible
measure
constitutional
protection
host
communications
command
respect
assertion
jesus
saves
abortion
murder
every
woman
right
choose
alcohol
kills
may
claim
constitutional
exemption
ordinance
strong
roland
vincent
city
council
see
abood
detroit
board
education
create
exception
appellees
political
speech
types
speech
might
create
risk
engaging
constitutionally
forbidden
content
discrimination
see
carey
brown
police
department
chicago
mosley
moreover
volume
permissible
postings
mandated
exemption
might
limit
ordinance
effect
defeat
aim
combating
visual
blight
constitutionally
mandated
exception
city
total
prohibition
temporary
signs
public
property
necessarily
rest
judicial
determination
city
traffic
control
safety
interests
little
applicability
within
excepted
category
city
interests
esthetics
sufficiently
important
justify
prohibition
category
findings
district
provide
basis
questioning
substantiality
esthetic
interest
stake
believing
uniquely
important
form
communication
abridged
categories
expression
engaged
taxpayers
cogs
therefore
accept
city
position
may
decide
esthetic
interest
avoiding
visual
clutter
justifies
removal
signs
creating
increasing
clutter
findings
district
cogs
signs
add
problems
addressed
ordinance
permitted
remain
encourage
others
post
additional
signs
sufficient
justify
application
ordinance
appellees
recognized
metromedia
city
sufficient
basis
believing
billboards
traffic
hazards
unattractive
obviously
direct
perhaps
effective
approach
solving
problems
create
prohibit
true
billboards
esthetic
interests
implicated
temporary
signs
presumptively
work
parts
city
including
appellees
posted
signs
basis
record
case
upon
rebut
presumption
interests
psychological
economic
character
environment
affects
quality
life
value
property
residential
commercial
areas
hold
record
interests
sufficiently
substantial
justify
impartially
administered
prohibition
posting
appellees
temporary
signs
public
property
application
ordinance
create
unacceptable
threat
profound
national
commitment
principle
debate
public
issues
uninhibited
robust
new
york
times
sullivan
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
ordered
footnotes
sec
signs
public
places
objects
person
shall
paint
mark
write
post
otherwise
affix
sign
upon
sidewalk
crosswalk
curb
curbstone
street
lamp
post
hydrant
tree
shrub
tree
stake
guard
railroad
trestle
electric
light
power
telephone
telegraph
trolley
wire
pole
wire
appurtenance
thereof
upon
fixture
fire
alarm
police
telegraph
system
upon
lighting
system
public
bridge
drinking
fountain
life
buoy
life
preserver
life
boat
life
saving
equipment
street
sign
traffic
sign
nothing
section
contained
shall
apply
installation
terrazzo
sidewalks
sidewalks
similar
construction
sidewalks
permanently
colored
admixture
material
constructed
board
public
works
granted
written
permit
sign
found
posted
otherwise
affixed
upon
public
property
contrary
provisions
section
may
removed
police
department
department
public
works
person
responsible
illegal
posting
shall
liable
cost
incurred
removal
thereof
department
public
works
authorized
effect
collection
said
cost
nothing
section
shall
apply
installation
metal
plaque
plate
individual
letters
figures
sidewalk
commemorating
historical
cultural
artistic
event
location
personality
board
public
works
approval
council
granted
written
permit
nothing
section
shall
apply
painting
house
numbers
upon
curbs
done
permits
issued
board
public
works
accordance
provisions
section
code
first
amendment
provides
congress
shall
make
law
abridging
freedom
speech
press
fourteenth
amendment
city
ordinances
within
scope
limitation
governmental
authority
lovell
griffin
first
signs
identified
march
weekly
report
leonard
nite
club
raul
palomo
alamar
travel
bureau
roland
vincent
item
madam
wongs
american
club
salon
broadway
rose
royce
vernon
auditorium
apache
total
experience
jupiter
app
convenience
shall
refer
parties
simply
city
app
juris
statement
los
angeles
planning
zoning
code
enacted
part
encourage
appropriate
use
land
conserve
stabilize
value
property
provide
adequate
open
spaces
light
air
prevent
fight
fire
lessen
congestion
streets
facilitate
adequate
provisions
community
utilities
facilities
promote
health
safety
general
welfare
accordance
comprehensive
plan
finding
app
juris
statement
app
juris
statement
district
finding
reads
full
follows
large
number
signs
illegally
posted
items
public
utility
property
enumerated
section
constitute
clutter
visual
blight
posting
signs
utility
pole
cross
wires
plaintiffs
seek
authorization
add
somewhat
blight
inevitably
encourage
greatly
increased
posting
unauthorized
unsightly
places
people
aware
distinction
plaintiffs
seek
make
finding
app
juris
statement
finding
app
juris
statement
conclusion
law
app
juris
statement
nevertheless
acknowledged
subsequent
experience
less
comprehensive
prohibition
prove
ineffective
achieving
city
goals
might
reenact
ordinance
struck
authority
procedure
cited
ratner
function
due
process
clause
rev
question
whether
stromberg
constitutionally
convicted
displaying
red
flag
symbol
opposition
organized
government
stromberg
supervisor
summer
camp
children
camp
curriculum
stressed
class
consciousness
solidarity
workers
morning
camp
red
flag
raised
children
recited
pledge
allegiance
workers
flag
statute
stromberg
convicted
prohibited
peaceful
display
symbol
opposition
organized
government
wrote
maintenance
opportunity
free
political
discussion
end
government
may
responsive
people
changes
may
obtained
lawful
means
opportunity
essential
security
republic
fundamental
principle
constitutional
system
statute
upon
face
authoritatively
construed
vague
indefinite
permit
punishment
fair
use
opportunity
repugnant
guaranty
liberty
contained
fourteenth
amendment
statute
invalid
upon
face
conviction
appellant
must
set
aside
lovell
convicted
distributing
religious
pamphlets
without
license
local
ordinance
required
license
distribute
literature
gave
chief
police
power
deny
license
order
abate
anything
considered
nuisance
wrote
think
ordinance
invalid
face
whatever
motive
induced
adoption
character
strikes
foundation
freedom
press
subjecting
license
censorship
struggle
freedom
press
primarily
directed
power
licensor
power
john
milton
directed
assault
appeal
liberty
unlicensed
printing
liberty
press
became
initially
right
publish
without
license
formerly
published
one
freedom
previous
restraint
upon
publication
regarded
exhausting
guaranty
liberty
prevention
restraint
leading
purpose
adoption
constitutional
provision
omitted
stromberg
justification
statute
suppression
ideas
lovell
since
attempt
made
tailor
licensing
requirement
substantive
evil
unrelated
suppression
ideas
statute
created
unacceptable
risk
used
suppress
statutes
enforcement
carries
risk
enforcement
used
merely
suppress
speech
since
statute
aimed
substantive
evil
within
power
government
prohibit
subsequent
cases
continued
employ
facial
invalidation
found
every
application
statute
created
impermissible
risk
suppression
ideas
see
saia
new
york
ordinance
prohibited
use
loudspeaker
public
places
without
permission
chief
police
whose
discretion
unlimited
cantwell
connecticut
ordinance
required
license
distribute
religious
literature
without
standards
exercising
licensing
discretion
schneider
state
ordinances
prohibited
distributing
leaflets
without
license
provided
standards
issuance
licenses
hague
cio
plurality
opinion
statute
permitted
city
deny
permit
public
demonstration
subject
uncontrolled
discretion
director
public
safety
merely
sporadic
abuse
power
censor
pervasive
threat
inherent
existence
constitutes
danger
freedom
discussion
one
might
license
asking
may
therefor
call
question
whole
scheme
licensing
prosecuted
failure
procure
like
threat
inherent
penal
statute
like
question
aim
specifically
evils
within
allowable
area
state
control
contrary
sweeps
within
ambit
activities
ordinary
circumstances
constitute
exercise
freedom
speech
press
existence
statute
readily
lends
harsh
discriminatory
enforcement
local
prosecuting
officials
particular
groups
deemed
merit
displeasure
results
continuous
pervasive
restraint
freedom
discussion
might
reasonably
regarded
within
purview
citation
omitted
representative
statement
doctrine
found
gooding
wilson
least
statutes
regulate
proscribe
speech
readily
apparent
construction
suggests
vehicle
rehabilitating
statutes
single
prosecution
dombrowski
pfister
transcendent
value
society
constitutionally
protected
expression
deemed
justify
allowing
attacks
overly
broad
statutes
requirement
person
making
attack
demonstrate
conduct
regulated
statute
drawn
requisite
narrow
specificity
deemed
necessary
persons
whose
expression
constitutionally
protected
may
well
refrain
exercising
rights
fear
criminal
sanctions
provided
statute
susceptible
application
protected
expression
citations
omitted
see
also
csc
letter
carriers
never
held
statute
held
invalid
face
merely
possible
conceive
single
impermissible
application
sense
requirement
substantial
overbreadth
already
implicit
doctrine
broadrick
brennan
dissenting
simply
put
doctrine
asserts
overbroad
regulation
speech
publication
may
subject
facial
review
invalidation
even
though
application
instant
case
constitutionally
unobjectionable
thus
person
whose
activity
validly
suppressed
narrowly
drawn
law
allowed
challenge
overbroad
law
application
others
bare
possibility
unconstitutional
application
enough
law
unconstitutionally
overbroad
reaches
substantially
beyond
permissible
scope
legislative
regulation
thus
issue
overbreadth
doctrine
whether
government
restriction
speech
arguably
valid
applied
case
hand
nevertheless
invalidated
avoid
substantial
prospect
unconstitutional
application
elsewhere
jeffries
rethinking
prior
restraint
yale
emphasis
supplied
brief
appellees
affidavit
support
motion
partial
summary
judgment
president
cogs
stated
cogs
signs
posted
sidewalk
surfaces
streetlamp
posts
hydrants
trees
shrubs
treestacks
guards
vertical
utility
poles
fire
alarm
police
telegraph
systems
drinking
fountains
lifebuoys
life
preservers
lifesaving
equipment
street
traffic
signs
see
app
fact
ordinance
capable
valid
applications
necessarily
mean
valid
applied
litigants
may
simply
assume
ordinance
always
advance
asserted
state
interests
sufficiently
justify
abridgment
expressive
activity
landmark
communications
virginia
see
also
brown
socialist
workers
campaign
committee
primus
buckley
valeo
per
curiam
police
department
chicago
mosley
stanley
georgia
robel
mine
workers
illinois
bar
naacp
alabama
ex
rel
patterson
although
taxpayers
presumably
devote
resources
expended
posting
political
signs
public
property
forms
communication
complied
ordinance
shall
assume
ordinance
diminishes
total
quantity
speech
justice
reed
wrote
unwilling
listener
like
may
offered
pamphlet
street
made
take
home
street
practically
helpless
escape
interference
privacy
loud
speakers
except
protection
municipality
city
streets
recognized
normal
place
exchange
ideas
speech
paper
mean
freedom
beyond
control
think
permissible
exercise
legislative
discretion
bar
sound
trucks
broadcasts
public
interest
amplified
loud
raucous
volume
public
ways
municipalities
business
streets
cities
like
trenton
people
distractions
dangerous
traffic
hours
useful
dissemination
information
residential
thoroughfares
quiet
tranquility
desirable
city
dwellers
likewise
mercy
advocates
particular
religious
social
political
persuasions
believe
rights
free
speech
compel
municipality
allow
mechanical
voice
amplification
streets
plurality
opinion
appeals
relied
justice
brennan
opinion
concurring
judgment
metromedia
support
conclusion
city
interest
esthetics
sufficiently
substantial
outweigh
constitutional
interest
free
expression
unless
city
proved
undertaken
comprehensive
coordinated
effort
remove
elements
visual
clutter
within
san
diego
reliance
misplaced
justice
brennan
analysis
expressly
rejected
majority
moreover
justice
brennan
concerned
san
diego
ordinance
might
fact
substantial
salutary
effect
appearance
city
ameliorate
types
visual
clutter
beside
billboards
see
thus
suggesting
fact
applied
areas
advance
interest
esthetics
sufficiently
justify
abridgment
speech
similarly
chief
justice
wrote
city
power
regulate
visual
clutter
much
manner
regulate
feature
environment
pollution
limited
air
breathe
water
drink
equally
offend
eye
ear
dissenting
opinion
metromedia
majority
concluded
prohibition
billboards
narrowly
tailored
visual
evil
san
diego
sought
correct
see
plurality
opinion
stevens
dissenting
part
burger
dissenting
rehnquist
dissenting
first
place
whether
onsite
advertising
permitted
prohibition
offsite
advertising
directly
related
stated
objectives
traffic
safety
esthetics
altered
fact
ordinance
underinclusive
permits
onsite
advertising
third
san
diego
obviously
chosen
value
one
kind
commercial
speech
onsite
advertising
another
kind
commercial
speech
offsite
advertising
ordinance
reflects
decision
city
former
interest
latter
stronger
city
interests
traffic
safety
esthetics
city
decided
limited
instance
onsite
commercial
advertising
interests
yield
reject
judgment
cf
schneider
state
ne
exercise
liberty
expression
appropriate
places
abridged
plea
may
exercised
place
although
shown
special
solicitude
forms
expression
much
less
expensive
feasible
alternative
hence
may
important
large
segment
citizenry
see
martin
struthers
door
door
distribution
circulars
essential
poorly
financed
causes
little
people
solicitude
practical
boundaries
see
kovacs
cooper
people
may
easily
cheaply
reached
sound
trucks
enough
call
forth
constitutional
protection
charged
public
welfare
reasonably
think
nuisance
easy
means
publicity
open
see
also
metromedia
san
diego
stevens
dissenting
part
ban
graffiti
constitutionally
permissible
even
though
creators
graffiti
may
equally
effective
alternative
means
public
expression
tangible
property
owned
government
used
communicate
bumper
stickers
may
placed
official
automobiles
yet
appellees
seriously
claim
right
attach
taxpayer
vincent
bumper
stickers
automobiles
point
government
relationship
things
dominion
control
virtually
identical
private
owner
property
interest
kinds
things
circumstances
state
less
private
owner
property
power
preserve
property
control
use
lawfully
dedicated
adderley
florida
dispositive
label
posting
signs
public
property
discrete
medium
expression
also
limited
utility
context
case
focus
whether
tangible
property
deemed
public
forum
generally
analysis
whether
property
public
forum
provides
workable
analytical
tool
however
analytical
line
regulation
time
place
manner
first
amendment
rights
may
exercised
traditional
public
forum
question
whether
particular
piece
personal
real
property
owned
controlled
government
fact
public
forum
may
blur
edges
postal
service
greenburgh
civic
particularly
true
cases
falling
paradigms
government
property
interests
essentially
mirroring
analogous
private
interests
clearly
held
trust
either
tradition
recent
convention
use
citizens
large
see
generally
mine
workers
illinois
state
bar
taxpayers
cogs
also
argue
ordinance
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
contains
certain
exceptions
street
banners
certain
permanent
signs
commemorative
plaques
gives
property
owners
may
authorize
posting
signs
premises
advantage
nonproperty
owners
political
campaigns
arguments
appear
addressed
appeals
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
justice
blackmun
join
dissenting
plurality
opinion
metromedia
san
diego
concluded
city
san
diego
consistently
first
amendment
restrict
commercial
use
billboards
order
preserve
improve
appearance
city
today
sustains
constitutionality
los
angeles
similarly
motivated
ban
posting
political
signs
public
property
lenient
approach
towards
restriction
speech
reasons
aesthetics
threatens
seriously
undermine
protections
first
amendment
dissent
finds
city
interest
eliminating
visual
clutter
sufficiently
substantial
justify
effect
ordinance
appellees
expression
effect
ordinance
speech
greater
necessary
accomplish
city
purpose
ante
right
questions
consider
analyzing
constitutionality
challenged
ordinance
see
metromedia
supra
brennan
concurring
judgment
heffron
international
society
krishna
consciousness
brennan
concurring
part
dissenting
part
answers
provides
reflect
startling
insensitivity
principles
embodied
first
amendment
view
city
los
angeles
shown
interest
eliminating
visual
clutter
justifies
restriction
appellees
ability
communicate
local
electorate
recognizes
medium
communicating
ideas
information
presents
particular
problems
analysis
first
amendment
concerns
implicated
given
medium
must
therefore
sensitive
particular
problems
characteristics
posting
signs
course
means
communicating
broad
range
ideas
information
particularly
cities
towns
time
unfettered
proliferation
signs
public
fixtures
may
offend
public
legitimate
desire
preserve
orderly
aesthetically
pleasing
urban
environment
case
metromedia
called
upon
adjudge
constitutionality
first
amendment
local
government
response
recurring
dilemma
namely
clash
public
aesthetic
interest
controlling
use
billboards
signs
handbills
similar
means
communication
first
amendment
interest
wish
use
media
express
views
learn
views
others
matters
importance
community
deciding
first
amendment
question
critical
importance
posting
signs
means
communication
must
overlooked
use
medium
communication
particularly
valuable
part
entails
relatively
small
expense
reaching
wide
audience
allows
flexibility
accommodating
various
formats
typographies
graphics
conveys
message
manner
easily
read
understood
reader
viewer
may
alternative
channels
communication
prevalence
large
number
signs
los
angeles
strong
indication
many
speakers
alternatives
far
less
satisfactory
cf
southeastern
promotions
conrad
nevertheless
city
los
angeles
asserts
ample
alternative
avenues
communication
available
city
notes
although
posting
signs
public
property
prohibited
posting
signs
private
property
distribution
handbills
brief
appellants
showing
either
alternatives
serve
appellees
needs
nearly
well
posting
signs
public
property
first
proof
sufficient
number
private
parties
allow
posting
signs
property
indeed
common
sense
suggests
contrary
least
instances
speaker
message
generally
unpopular
simply
unpopular
among
property
owners
hardly
likely
get
message
across
forced
rely
medium
difficult
believe
example
group
advocating
increase
rate
property
tax
succeed
persuading
private
property
owners
accept
signs
similarly
adequacy
distributing
handbills
dubious
despite
certain
advantages
handbills
signs
see
martin
struthers
particularly
message
carried
best
expressed
words
graphic
image
message
sign
typically
reach
far
people
one
handbill
message
posted
sign
remains
seen
passersby
long
posted
handbill
typically
read
single
reader
discarded
thus
must
handbills
printed
large
quantity
many
hours
must
spent
distributing
average
cost
communicating
handbill
therefore
likely
far
higher
average
cost
communicating
poster
reason
signs
posted
public
property
doubtless
essential
poorly
financed
causes
little
people
prohibition
constitutes
total
ban
important
medium
communication
cf
stone
fora
americana
speech
public
places
rev
city
completely
banned
use
particular
medium
communication
given
circumstances
equivalent
alternative
media
provide
adequate
substitute
must
examine
particular
care
justifications
city
proffers
ban
see
metromedia
supra
brennan
concurring
judgment
linmark
associates
willingboro
ii
acknowledges
ante
ordinance
significantly
limits
communicative
activity
delicate
difficult
task
falls
upon
courts
weigh
circumstances
appraise
substantiality
reasons
advanced
support
regulation
schneider
state
first
task
determine
whether
ordinance
aimed
suppressing
content
speech
whether
compelling
state
interest
justifies
suppression
consolidated
edison
public
service
police
department
chicago
mosley
restriction
task
determine
whether
governmental
objective
advanced
restriction
substantial
whether
restriction
imposed
speech
greater
essential
objective
unless
conditions
met
restriction
must
invalidated
see
ante
suggestion
metromedia
courts
exercise
special
care
addressing
questions
purely
aesthetic
objective
asserted
justify
restriction
speech
specifically
deferring
city
judgment
must
convinced
city
seriously
comprehensively
addressing
aesthetic
concerns
respect
environment
adhere
view
correctness
premised
largely
concern
aesthetic
interests
easy
city
assert
difficult
evaluate
reaffirmed
case
fundamental
problem
kind
case
purely
aesthetic
state
interest
offered
justify
restriction
speech
governmental
objective
justified
solely
terms
like
proscribing
intrusive
unpleasant
formats
expression
ante
creates
difficulties
reviewing
fulfilling
obligation
ensure
government
regulation
trespass
upon
protections
secured
first
amendment
source
difficulties
unavoidable
subjectivity
aesthetic
judgments
fact
beauty
eye
beholder
consequence
subjectivity
laws
defended
aesthetic
grounds
raise
problems
judicial
review
presented
laws
defended
objective
grounds
national
security
public
health
public
safety
practice
therefore
inherent
subjectivity
aesthetic
judgments
makes
easy
government
fashion
justification
law
manner
impairs
ability
reviewing
meaningfully
make
required
inquiries
initially
reviewing
faces
substantial
difficulties
determining
whether
actual
objective
related
suppression
speech
asserted
interest
aesthetics
may
facade
suppression
course
agree
improvement
preservation
aesthetic
environment
important
governmental
functions
restrictions
speech
may
necessary
carry
functions
metromedia
supra
governmental
interest
aesthetics
regarded
sufficiently
compelling
justify
restriction
speech
based
assertion
content
speech
aesthetically
displeasing
cohen
california
aesthetic
judgments
subjective
however
easy
government
enact
restrictions
speech
illegitimate
reasons
evade
effective
judicial
review
asserting
restriction
aimed
displeasing
aspect
speech
solely
communicative
example
sound
appearance
location
objective
standard
evaluating
claimed
aesthetic
judgments
therefore
essential
without
one
courts
reliable
means
assessing
genuineness
claims
example
evaluating
ordinance
us
case
city
might
pursuing
either
two
objectives
motivated
two
different
judgments
one
objective
might
elimination
visual
clutter
attributable
whole
part
signs
posted
public
property
aesthetic
judgment
underlying
objective
clutter
created
signs
offends
community
desire
orderly
visually
pleasing
environment
second
objective
might
simply
elimination
messages
typically
carried
signs
case
aesthetic
judgment
signs
messages
displeasing
first
objective
lawful
course
second
yet
city
might
easily
mask
second
objective
asserting
first
declaring
signs
constitute
visual
clutter
short
must
avoid
unquestioned
acceptance
city
bare
declaration
aesthetic
objective
lest
fail
duty
prevent
unlawful
trespasses
upon
first
amendment
protections
total
ban
important
medium
communication
may
upheld
government
proves
ban
furthers
substantial
government
objective
constitutes
least
means
achieving
objective
schad
mount
ephraim
however
meaningful
judicial
application
standards
seriously
frustrated
one
doubts
importance
general
governmental
interest
aesthetics
order
justify
restriction
speech
particular
objective
behind
restriction
must
substantial
grace
perry
education
assn
perry
local
educators
therefore
order
uphold
restriction
speech
imposed
aesthetic
objective
must
ascertain
substantiality
specific
objective
pursued
although
courts
ordinarily
defer
government
assertion
objective
substantial
assertion
immune
critical
examination
see
schad
mount
ephraim
supra
particularly
true
aesthetic
objectives
underlie
restrictions
cases
independent
judicial
assessment
substantiality
government
interest
difficult
aesthetic
judgments
entirely
subjective
government
may
easily
overstate
substantiality
goals
accordingly
unless
courts
carefully
scrutinize
restrictions
speech
risk
standing
idly
important
media
communication
foreclosed
sake
insubstantial
governmental
objectives
similarly
total
ban
justified
solely
terms
aesthetics
means
inquiry
necessary
evaluate
constitutionality
ban
may
impeded
deliberate
unintended
government
manipulation
governmental
objectives
purely
aesthetic
usually
expressed
virtually
limitless
variety
ways
consequently
objectives
tailored
fit
whatever
program
government
devises
promote
general
aesthetic
interests
government
identified
substantial
aesthetic
objective
selected
preferred
means
achieving
objective
possible
government
correct
mismatch
means
ends
redefining
ends
conform
means
case
example
several
objectives
might
city
actual
substantial
goal
banning
temporary
signs
elimination
signs
throughout
city
elimination
signs
certain
parts
city
reduction
density
signs
although
total
ban
posting
signs
public
property
least
restrictive
means
achieving
first
objective
effective
means
achieving
two
well
quite
possible
therefore
city
might
select
ban
means
general
interest
solving
sign
problem
without
explicitly
considering
three
specific
objectives
really
substantial
selected
total
ban
preferred
means
city
strongly
inclined
characterize
first
objective
substantial
one
might
done
purposefully
order
conform
ban
requirement
might
done
inadvertently
natural
concomitant
considering
means
ends
together
regardless
done
reviewing
confronted
statement
substantiality
subjectivity
makes
impossible
question
face
possibility
interdependence
means
ends
development
policies
promote
aesthetics
poses
major
obstacle
judicial
review
availability
alternative
means
less
restrictive
speech
indeed
reviews
restriction
speech
imposed
order
promote
aesthetic
objective
significant
possibility
able
little
pay
lipservice
first
amendment
inquiry
availability
less
restrictive
alternatives
means
may
fit
ends
ends
defined
means
mind
case
example
city
expressed
aesthetic
judgment
signs
public
property
constitute
visual
clutter
throughout
city
objective
eliminate
visual
clutter
asked
determine
whether
objective
achieved
less
restriction
speech
ask
question
highlight
circularity
inquiry
since
goal
least
currently
expressed
essentially
eliminate
signs
available
means
achieving
goal
eliminate
signs
ease
means
equated
aesthetic
ends
confirms
importance
close
judicial
scrutiny
substantiality
ends
see
supra
case
example
essential
assess
city
ban
signs
evaluating
whether
city
substantial
interest
eliminating
visual
clutter
caused
posted
signs
throughout
city
distinguished
interest
banning
signs
areas
preventing
densely
packed
signs
fact
either
latter
two
objectives
constitute
substantial
interest
underlying
ordinance
achieved
means
far
less
restrictive
speech
total
ban
signs
ban
therefore
invalid
regrettably
analysis
seriously
inadequate
failed
develop
reliable
means
gauging
nature
depth
city
commitment
pursuing
goal
eradicating
visual
clutter
simply
approves
ordinance
cursory
degree
judicial
oversight
without
stopping
consider
carefully
whether
supposed
commitment
genuine
substantial
essentially
defers
city
aesthetic
judgment
precludes
serious
assessment
availability
alternative
means
begins
simply
affirming
problem
addressed
ordinance
visual
assault
citizens
los
angeles
presented
accumulation
signs
posted
public
property
constitutes
significant
substantive
end
within
city
power
prohibit
ante
addressing
availability
less
restrictive
alternatives
little
state
unsurprising
conclusion
banning
signs
city
eliminate
exact
source
evil
sought
remedy
ante
finally
explain
ease
reaches
conclusion
notes
ith
respect
signs
posted
appellees
tangible
medium
expressing
message
adverse
impact
appearance
landscape
ante
demonstrated
precisely
ability
state
make
judgment
lead
us
approach
cases
caution
iii
fact
difficulties
inherent
judicial
review
restrictions
speech
imply
government
may
engage
activities
said
improvement
preservation
aesthetic
environment
often
legitimate
important
governmental
functions
implementation
functions
creates
special
dangers
first
amendment
freedoms
need
stringent
judicial
scrutiny
seems
willing
exercise
cases
like
total
ban
imposed
particularly
valuable
method
communication
require
government
provide
tangible
proof
legitimacy
substantiality
aesthetic
objective
justifications
restrictions
articulated
government
critically
examined
determine
whether
government
committed
addressing
identified
aesthetic
problem
view
statements
aesthetic
objectives
accepted
substantial
unrelated
suppression
speech
government
demonstrates
pursuing
identified
objective
seriously
comprehensively
ways
unrelated
restriction
speech
metromedia
brennan
concurring
judgment
without
demonstration
invalidate
restriction
violative
first
amendment
requiring
type
showing
courts
ensure
governmental
regulation
aesthetic
environment
remains
within
constraints
established
first
amendment
first
reasonably
reliable
indication
content
communicative
aspect
speech
government
finds
unaesthetic
second
restriction
speech
part
comprehensive
seriously
pursued
program
promote
aesthetic
objective
reliable
indication
government
assessment
substantiality
objective
finally
aesthetic
objective
pursued
one
front
better
basis
upon
ascertain
precise
nature
thereby
determine
whether
means
selected
least
restrictive
ones
achieving
objective
mean
government
must
address
aesthetic
problems
one
time
government
hesitate
pursue
aesthetic
objectives
mean
however
objective
pursued
may
pursued
solely
expense
first
amendment
freedoms
may
pursued
arbitrarily
discriminating
form
speech
aesthetic
characteristics
forms
speech
also
present
community
see
metromedia
supra
brennan
concurring
judgment
accordingly
order
los
angeles
succeed
defending
total
ban
posting
signs
city
demonstrate
pursuing
goal
eliminating
visual
clutter
serious
comprehensive
manner
importantly
city
show
pursuing
goal
programs
ban
signs
least
programs
address
visual
clutter
problem
means
entail
restriction
speech
programs
parallel
ban
stringency
geographical
scope
aesthetic
focus
case
however
appeals
found
indication
city
addressed
visual
clutter
problem
way
prohibiting
posting
signs
throughout
city
without
regard
density
presence
therefore
hold
prohibition
violates
appellees
first
amendment
rights
light
extreme
stringency
los
angeles
ban
barring
signs
posted
wide
geographical
scope
covering
entire
city
might
difficult
los
angeles
make
type
showing
suggested
cf
metromedia
supra
limited
approach
visual
clutter
problem
however
might
well
pass
constitutional
muster
doubt
signs
posted
public
property
certain
areas
including
perhaps
parts
los
angeles
contribute
type
eyesore
city
genuinely
substantial
interest
eliminating
areas
might
include
parts
city
particularly
pristine
reserved
certain
uses
designated
reflect
certain
themes
blighted
renovation
necessary
presumably
types
areas
city
also
regulate
aesthetic
environment
ways
banning
temporary
signs
city
might
zone
areas
particular
type
development
lack
development
might
actively
create
particular
type
environment
might
especially
vigilant
keeping
area
clean
might
regulate
size
location
permanent
signs
might
reserve
particular
locations
kiosks
posting
temporary
signs
similarly
los
angeles
might
able
attack
visual
clutter
problem
areas
city
reducing
stringency
ban
perhaps
regulating
density
temporary
signs
coupling
approach
additional
measures
designed
reduce
forms
visual
clutter
variety
ways
aesthetic
environment
regulated
restrictive
speech
others
aesthetic
regulation
addressed
comprehensive
focused
manner
ensure
goals
pursued
substantial
manner
pursued
restrictive
speech
necessary
absence
showing
case
believe
los
angeles
total
ban
sweeps
broadly
trenches
completely
appellees
use
important
medium
political
expression
must
struck
violative
first
amendment
therefore
dissent
according
appeals
street
inspection
personnel
removed
illegally
posted
signs
january
may
course
restriction
must
also
leave
open
ample
alternative
avenues
communication
see
supra
page
safety
health
national
security
subjective
aspects
well
wholly
subjective
objectives
invoked
justify
restriction
speech
courts
broadly
judge
plausibility
true
aesthetics
one
scholar
stated
aesthetic
policy
currently
formulated
implemented
federal
state
local
levels
often
partakes
high
farce
rule
law
purposes
seldom
accurately
candidly
portrayed
let
alone
understood
vehement
champions
diversion
dubious
flatly
deplorable
social
ends
undermines
credit
may
merit
soundly
conceived
executed
indiscriminate
often
quixotic
demands
overwhelmed
legal
institutions
frequently
compromised
integrity
legislative
administrative
judicial
processes
name
beauty
costonis
law
aesthetics
critique
reformation
dilemmas
rev
fact
ban
temporary
signs
applies
signs
necessarily
imply
particular
media
often
used
disproportionately
certain
types
messages
restriction
face
may
fact
cf
stone
fora
americana
speech
public
places
rev
theoretically
though
remotely
possible
form
speech
distinctively
unaesthetic
comprehensive
program
aimed
eliminating
eyesore
causes
apply
unpleasant
form
speech
approach
suggest
program
invalid
restrict
speech
community
therefore
tolerate
displeasing
form
speech
doubt
disadvantage
approach
least
form
speech
restricted
constitutes
important
medium
communication
restriction
effect
total
ban
use
medium
price
must
pay
protect
first
amendment
liberties
use
aesthetics
alone
cloak
abridge
although
reach
question
appellants
argue
city
interest
traffic
safety
provides
independent
significant
justification
ban
signs
appeals
concluded
however
city
offered
prove
facts
raise
genuine
issue
regarding
traffic
safety
hazards
respect
posting
signs
many
objects
covered
ordinance