Courts strike down panhandling bans based on Supreme Court's sign decision
A U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down a sign ordinance in Gilbert, Arizona, is being cited by courts that are overturning panhandling bans as a violation of the First Amendment.
The lower courts have held the June 2015 decision prevents governments from banning speech on particular subjects, such as begging, Bloomberg Politics reports.
The Supreme Court decision, Reed v. Town of Gilbert, struck down a sign ordinance that imposed more stringent restrictions on “temporary directional signs” that directed people to meetings of churches and other groups.
Courts have struck down panhandling bans in Worcester and Lowell, Massachusetts; Portland, Maine; Springfield, Illinois; and Grand Junction, Colorado, according to the article. The courts ruling against the bans include the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Think Progress reported last October.
