Loading...
87-475 WHITE - CITV CI.ERK PINK - FINANCE GITY OF SAINT YAUL Council r /! ; yCANARV - OEPARTMENT File NO. ��- L �-� BLUE - MAVOR • / Zn �,e Ordinance N 0. Presented y � � — � � Referred To �-L�/S L�l4 � � Q � Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date An Ordinance repealing Chapter 287 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code which prohibits any person from distributing anonymous pamphlets. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section l . That Chapter 287 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code entitled Prohibition of Certain Anonymous Pamphlets , etc. , be and is here- by repealed in its entirety. Section 2. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days from and after its passage, approval and publication. COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Drew .�s,;. In Favor — Rettman � Scheibel Against BY Sonnen Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date MAY 2� 1987 Form Approv by City Atto ey Certified Pas e by Council Secretary BY By �.J� Approv Mayor: Date � po7 Appr e Mayor for S m' sio=to Council By PUBIISl�ED �';�H� 3 0 198� r_ � � • . � . � , . � F7-�7� . . �7�.s�-/ - ���T� �. CITY OF SAfNT PAUL `0 ' OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY • �F. a+ iii'ii"ii �� ,m „� EDWARD P. STARR, CITY ATTORNEY '1f�,�!e���° 647 City Hall, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 612-298-5121 GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR March 12 , 1987 - ° _, _ , `\ � �'�!...� r m . -� . ', . _- . o�-' �,.��'.Q' . . �� . ;-t � r�`. ��.. ' ; �, �i. :� - ��,1 . �.. ��; MAR 1 t�3 1987 ► `, \ „�� � - Mayor George Latimer '� 347 City Hal1 �';���.,_ Saint Paul , MN 55102 Dear Mayor Latimer: On December 8th you met with Matthew Stark and Debbie Mancheski representing the Minnesota Civil Liberties Union, and you asked that our office review their concerns and provide you with our analysis and recommendations. Saint Paul ordinance which requires identifying authorship of pamphlets that are being distributed: In the case at hand a Robert Halfhill was distributing leaflets at Macalester College Field House where Chief Justice Warren Burger and Associate Justice Antonin Scalia were appearing. He states that a police officer ordered him to discontinue handing out any literature which did not contain a statement of the iden- tity of the author, and the MCLU objects to such a requirement also on grounds of infringement of speech guarantees of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The ordinance in question is Chapter 287 (copy attached) . This ordinance was enacted in 1944 and has not been amended since that date. The United States Supreme Court ruled as unconstitu- tional an ordinance which required that all handbills, etc . , contain the names and addresses of its authors on grounds that such an ordinance violates rights of freedom of speech and press under the Fourteenth and First Amendments of the Constitution. (Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 , 4 L.Ed. 2d 559 , 80 S.Ct. 539 (1960) ) . In so ruling, the Court pointed out that the history of our country is replete with instances where unfavorable opin- ions were expressed by persons whose identity, if known, would not have been so willing or able to so freely express their opinions. This right of expression is so well grounded in our '� � • . • • , i;� ���`��`'. �1�S"La� Mayor Latimer Page Two March 12, 1987 history that the Court will recognize its right to protection. The Court ' s opinion stated that they were not ruling on whether the decision would be the same if the ordinance were limited in its application only to material which was obscene, offensive to public morals , advocated unlawful conduct, fraud, false adver- tising or libel . This decision in the Talley case has been cited many times by the courts , and is still the prevailing law of the country. The following tests will be applied by the courts when examining laws which tend to restrict or prohibit First Amendment rights: a) Such laws are presumed to be unconstitutional and the govern- ing body bears the burden of proving otherwise. b) The law must have a substantial relation to a weighty govern- mental interest (not just a legitimate governmental interest) . c) The law must be the least drastic means of protecting the governmental interest which is involved. The law' s restric- tions may be no greater than necessary or essential to the protection of the governmental interest. d) The la w must be drawn with narrow specificity. The above standards of review were expressed in Rosen v. Port of Portland, 641 F2d 1243 (CA 9 1981 ) when the ordinance requiring advance registration and identification of participants in organ- ized demonstrations at airport terminals was invalidated by the court on grounds that it was over-broad and that other means existed to adequately protect the governmental interests . RECOMMENDATION: It is my opinion that the application of ordi- nance to the specific situation involving Mr. Halfhill would not withstand a constitutional challenge. In the alternative , the ordinance may not be applicable to the type of literature being handed out by him, for it may not meet the ordinance requirements as tending to "expose any individual or any racial or religious group to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy" . In any event, the police should not have attempted to prohibit Mr. Halfhill from passing out his literature solely on the basis that the paper did not identify the author. There might be other legal grounds for limiting such activity if the people involved are disturbing the peace or are interfering with other persons ' rights. • � • � - r �� . • ° ' ` . ���.�� % _`.{�` !y y5?1 Mayor Latimer Page Three March 12, 1987 Our ordinance was enacted in 1944, prior to the decision of Talley v. California. This ordinance should be re-examined so as to determine what governmental purpose is being served by it, and in what way may the ordinance now be stated so as to meet the constitutional tests to be invoked by the courts in case of a challenge. To do otherwise may expose the City to a future claim for damages under a "1983" action, including the payment of attorneys fees. I further recommend that the police be instructed not to enforce this ordinance until such a review has been completed, and any legislative action taken to amend or to repeal the ordinance. Please advise if you wish to discuss this matter further, or if any more information or advice is required. Yo very truly ' l� � � J OtME J. ��L � ss�stant �ity Attorney � JJS : jr : � . . . ;-. , . . �j;'�y-��75. • . ! /7��/ i � i .- � 28T.01 LEGISLATIVE CODE �..,- CHAPTER 287.PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN ANONYMOUS + PAMPHLETS,ETC. 287.01. "Person" defined. The word "person" when used in this : chapter shall mean any person, individual, firm,partnership,cor- poration,organization,or any officer or agent thereof.(Code 1956, - as amended, @432.01.) _ 287.02. Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for any person to print, Fublish, or cause to be printed, published or distributed, by any • : � means or in any manner whatsoever, any handbill, dodger, circu- - . lar,booklet, pamphlet, leaflet,card, sticker,periodical, literature, or paper which tends to expose any individual or any racial or I religious group to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, unless � the same has clearly printed or written thereon: (a) The true name and post of�ce address of the person,firm, partnership, corporation, or organization causing the same to be printed, published, or distributed; and (b) If such name is that of a firm, corporation, or organiza- . tion, the name and post office address of the individual ; acting in its behalf in causing such printing, publication, � � - or distribution. (Code 1956, as amended, �432.02.) CHAPTER,288.TAMPERING WITH CIVIL DEFENSE WAR.NING SYSTEM 288.01. Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for any unauthorized per- son to use, operate, alter, interfere or tamper with any of the _ sirens, switchboxes, installations or equipment of the civil defense warning system of the city of Saint Paul. (Code 1956, as amended, �440.01.) i i CHAPTER 289.OFFENSES AGAINST TAXI DRIVEBS 289.01. Defrauding taxicab of fare. It is unlawful for any person, _ C. �.,,� •?I2RI81 � ' ' - , . , . � ��- � 75 : . .-., �7y5 y �;� ' CITY OF SAIN� PAUL "..:,.:�s OFFIC� OF TH� CITY COIINCIL N71��aNN��M '� . �"'�•"°'•' �'' 0 a t e : May 4, 1987 � � . - COMMITTEE RE PORT TO = Sa�nt Pau t Cit�r Councii � FROl1� = Connmii'te� pn LEGISLATION C ii!�I R : � JOHN OREW • 1 . Approval of the minutes from the meeting held April 20, 198�. APPROVED. � 2. An ordinance amending Chapter 409 of the Legislative Code � pertaining -to intoxicating � liquor and adding provisions for temporary wine and liquor licenses (on-sale) . Council File 87-396. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. 3. Resolution supporting leg�islation affirming temporary classifi- cation of data as protected non-public while negotiations are occurring pertaining to projects of the St. Paul Port Authority. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THIS RESOLUTION BE WITHDRAWN. � 4. An ordinance amending Chapter 310.Q4 of the Legistative Code pertaining to license procedures and adding Subd. 5. Appeal ; Class I or Class II licenses. Council File 87-474. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. 5. An a�d.i r�a��= ���-�heP��� .�83 of �he Legi��at i ve Code y�r-o�at��ng ,any per�on frc�r�n ctl-st�-�#�u�,f rrg anonymous pamph 1 ets. G�°re� p f Y e $�-475. COMM I-TT-�E- REC�MENDS APF�ROVAL. CITY HALL SEVE.*i'i'H FLOOR � SAINT PAUt..MINNESQTA SSI03 •�..