Phil vs The City Case Study Questions

You’re on the Jury : The Case of the Politically Incorrect Sign

Disturbedby the number and variety of signs that individuals were putting upwithin its borders, a City passed an ordinance prohibiting all signs onprivate property except in commercial areas for advertising. Phil, ahomeowner, pasted a sign on the front door of his house containing anAmerican flag with these words underneath the flag: “Down with theMayor and the City Council – Our rights are being violated”. He thenwent door to door in his neighborhood passing out copies of this signand asking his neighbors to display it as well. Phil was arrested forviolating the ordinance.

The Trial

Duringthe trial, a witness for the City described how many signs had appearedin the past on homes and on lawns for commercial home businesses,ruining the appearance of the community. He explained that many othercities and towns had experienced the same problems and that theordinance was reasonable and the only way to solve the problem. Therestriction, he said, was content neutral as it was addressing asocietal problem. Phil testified that the sign he had put up was asmall one and that other City residents had raised flags on nationalholidays and put up signs showing their patriotism. None of theseresidents had been arrested.

The Arguments at Trial

TheCity’s attorney argued that a city had the authority to regulate signswithin its borders to protect the appearance and value of properties.She further argued that the ordinance did not unduly restrict freespeech as there were other ways for residents to express their views:radio, television, and the newspapers. Phil’s attorney argued that theregulation violated the freedom of speech provisions of the federalconstitution, was too broad, too vague, and was unreasonable. He arguedthat the City could have limited the ordinance by restricting signsover a certain size and in certain locations. He further argued that itwas unreasonable to restrict the expression of opinions except for theuse of the media.

Discussion Questions to be Answered

1. Who has the stronger arguments, the City or Phil? Why?
2. What are the laws here that are being applied and is their application proper?
3. If you were the on the jury hearing this case, for whom would you decide? Why?