Federal judge orders 2 Cincinnati suburbs to allow political yard signs
By The Associated Press
10.30.00
Printer-friendly page
A lawsuit backed by the American Civil Liberties Union prompted a
federal judge last week to order two suburban Cincinnati communities to allow
display of political yard signs.
Meanwhile, a Westmont, Pa., resident — and the ACLU — say
the borough's threat to fine him for having more than one sign in his yard
violates his right to free speech.
Two Ohio residents, Winifred Boal of Indian Hill and Jo Ann Schartman
of Mariemont, complained that village police forced them to remove signs
promoting presidential candidates. The two did not identify the candidates they
were supporting.
The ACLU sued both Indian Hill and Mariemont on behalf of Boal and
Schartman, arguing that the ban on displaying political signs on their
properties violated their First Amendment rights. U.S. District Judge Susan
Dlott issued a temporary order on Oct. 27 directing both communities to allow
display of the signs.
The order will remain in force through the end of the year while the
villages review their ordinances.
Police in both villages say their local ordinances allow nonpolitical
signs on residential properties for purposes including home sales, name
identification and memorial plaques.
Meanwhile, officials in Westmont, Pa., say the four political campaign
signs in Robert Gleason's yard are an eyesore. Gleason, the Cambria County
Republican Committee chairman, was threatened with a fine in an Oct. 24 letter
from borough zoning officer Mark Walker. The letter says having more than one
sign in a yard violates Chapter 22 of the borough's ordinances.
Vic Walczak, executive director of the ACLU's Pittsburgh chapter, said
such ordinances are unconstitutional.
The ACLU fought a similar ordinance in Upper St. Clair Township near
Pittsburgh and not only won the right to maintain political signs, but also won
$30,000 to pay for legal fees, Walczak said. Similar cases have been decided
the same way by the U.S. Supreme Court, he said.
"We'd jump on this case in a minute," Walczak said. "A federal judge
would call this a no-brainer."
Gleason, who lives in the tiny borough west of Johnstown, said he's
not spoiling for a fight, but expects to discuss the matter with borough
officials after the Nov. 7 election. In the meantime, he's not removing the
signs that tout Texas Gov. George W. Bush and other Republican hopefuls for
office.
Borough Council President Susan Holmes says the ordinance is meant to
keep yards attractive and prevent permanent signs in yards — not to
muzzle free speech.
"It's never come up before where people felt this was a violation of
free speech," Holmes said. "We certainly don't want to hinder free speech.
We'll be happy to hear from him."
Update
Pennsylvania town to relax restrictions on political yard signs
Westmont resident had argued ordinance limiting signs to one per yard violated free-speech rights.
01.16.01
Related
Ohio Supreme Court strikes down city's limits on political yard signs
Justices reject Painesville ordinance that limits display of signs to 17 days before an election and two days after.
09.07.00
Pennsylvania town rescinds restrictions on political signs
ACLU had threatened to sue if council didn't abandon ordinance by 5 p.m. today.
10.08.99
Iowa town, civil rights group work to settle lawsuit over yard sign
'Nobody in the city of Coralville is in the business of squashing anyone's rights,' says assistant city attorney.
01.05.00
