Oklahoma City's banner ordinance won't fly with federal judge
By The Associated Press
09.18.02
Editor's note: Oklahoma City officials and the Cimarron Alliance have approved a settlement over the display of banners on utility and city poles.The Oklahoma City Council on Oct. 8 voted 8-1 to abide by the ruling that declared part of the city's banner ordinance unconstitutional. Under the agreement, the city is to pay "nominal damages" of $3, plus attorneys' fees. The city also must give the gay-rights group permission to display banners for its summer parade and delay consideration of changing or repealing the ordinance until January.
OKLAHOMA CITY — A city ordinance that kept a gay-pride group's banners off city light poles has been struck down by a federal judge.
The ordinance, adopted following public criticism of banners hung for the 2001 Gay and Lesbian Pride Parade, is an unconstitutional infringement on free-speech rights, U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron ruled.
The order, handed down Sept. 13, is a victory for the Cimarron Alliance Foundation, which sued the city after its application to post banners to recognize Gay and Lesbian History Month in June was rejected by City Manager Jim Couch.
"We always thought this was a First Amendment free-speech case. Judge Cauthron's decision vindicates that position," said Mark Henrickson, who represents the foundation on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Cauthron also ruled that Cimarron is entitled to damages from the city as well as court costs and attorneys fees but withheld setting an exact amount.
Couch said city officials were reviewing the decision.
"It's difficult to tell from the ruling whether we can have control on anything regarding banners or not," Couch said.
Tina Hughes, an attorney with the municipal counselor's office who represented the city, said the city could eventually appeal the decision or rewrite the ordinance to meet constitutional guidelines.
"I can't tell you what we'll do next," Hughes said. "It's kind of up in the air."
Cimarron won approval to hang its banners in 2001. But Couch ordered the banners to be taken down and replaced after the city began receiving complaints from the public. The banners were put back up after Cimarron threatened legal action.
An ordinance passed by the City Council in August 2001 prohibited banners from promoting "social advocacy" and required them to "promote or celebrate the city, its civic institutions, or public activities or events in the city."
But Cauthron ruled that the law was unconstitutionally vague and created viewpoint-based restrictions that gave city officials "the power to enforce the ordinance in a manner that favors some viewpoints over others."
The judge said that hoisting banners on city-owned light poles along public sidewalks, streets and medians created a public forum that is protected by the First Amendment.
She also said evidence indicated that Oklahoma City denied Cimarron's application to put up its banners based on the group's beliefs and advocacy.
"For the last 50 years, the Supreme Court has made it clear that such a denial is unconstitutional," Cauthron said.
Henrickson said Cimarron planned to file new applications to hang the banners.
"My clients hope to participate in the banner program like any other citizen," Henrickson said.