City of Ladue v. Gilleo
United States Supreme Court
512 U.S. 43, 114 S. Ct. 2038, 129 L. Ed. 2D 36 (1994)
- Written by Dennis Chong, JD
Facts
Gilleo (plaintiff) lived in the City of Ladue (the city) (defendant). On two occasions, Gilleo attempted to put signs in her yard advocating political causes, but the first time the sign was removed and the second time it was defaced. Gilleo complained to the police, but she was told that the city prohibited such signs. Gilleo’s request for a variance was denied. Gilleo brought suit alleging infringement of her First Amendment rights. The trial court granted her a temporary injunction, but the city responded by repealing its ordinance and enacting a new one that removed the availability of a variance. The statute stated that it was passed in an effort to discourage the visual clutter that would result from an unlimited amount of signs in the city. Gilleo amended her complaint to target the new ordinance. The trial court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it treated commercial speech more favorably than noncommercial speech and, therefore, was a content-based regulation. The city appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
