Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Reed v. Town of Gilbert

Supreme Court of the United States · 2015 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawPropertyFirst AmendmentFreedom of SpeechSign RegulationContent-Based RestrictionsFirst Amendmentcontent based

Facts

Gilbert's sign code generally required permits for outdoor signs but exempted 23 categories, including ideological signs, political signs, and temporary directional signs relating to a qualifying event. The code allowed ideological signs the most favorable treatment, political signs less favorable treatment, and temporary directional signs the least favorable treatment in size, number, location, and timing. Good News Community Church, which met at changing locations, posted temporary signs showing the church's name and the time and location of Sunday services. The Town cited the Church for violating the time limits and other requirements applicable to temporary directional signs and refused to grant leniency.

Issue

Whether Gilbert's sign code, which imposed different restrictions on signs based on whether they were ideological, political, or temporary directional signs relating to a qualifying event, was a content-based regulation of speech subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment.

Rule

A law is content based if on its face it draws distinctions based on the message a speaker conveys, including distinctions based on subject matter, function, or purpose. Facially content-based laws are presumptively unconstitutional and are subject to strict scrutiny regardless of the government's motive, justification, or absence of animus; to survive, the government must prove the law is narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Mesa, Arizona adopts a sign ordinance that exempts signs from permit requirements only if they fall into one of three categories: "community philosophy" signs, "election advocacy" signs, and "event wayfinding" signs. Each category has different limits on size and duration, and code officers must read the sign to determine which rules apply.

If a resident challenges the ordinance, which is the strongest constitutional analysis?

Explanation. A law is content based if, on its face, it draws distinctions based on the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed. That includes categories defined by subject matter, function, or purpose. If officials must determine what a sign says in order to know which rule applies, the law is facially content based and triggers strict scrutiny, regardless of the city's motive.