Scribd
Upload
138 views1 page

Berger V City of Seattle

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in favor of the plaintiff Berger. The appeals court found that the rules issued by Seattle Center requiring street performers to obtain permits and wear badges were content-neutral time, place and manner restrictions that were narrowly tailored to serve the city's significant interests in public safety and convenience. The rules reduced disputes among performers and allowed identification of offenders in response to complaints about threatening behavior by some street performers like the plaintiff.

Uploaded by

jim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
138 views1 page

Berger V City of Seattle

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in favor of the plaintiff Berger. The appeals court found that the rules issued by Seattle Center requiring street performers to obtain permits and wear badges were content-neutral time, place and manner restrictions that were narrowly tailored to serve the city's significant interests in public safety and convenience. The rules reduced disputes among performers and allowed identification of offenders in response to complaints about threatening behavior by some street performers like the plaintiff.

Uploaded by

jim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

BERGER v.

CITY OF SEATTLE
United States Court of Appeals
Ninth Circuit, 2008.
512 F.3d 582.

FACTS
The Seattle Center is an entertainment “zone” in downtown Seattle, Washington, that attracts
nearly ten million tourists each year. The center encompasses theaters, arenas, museums,
exhibition halls, conference rooms, outdoor stadiums, and restaurants, and features street
performers. Under the authority of the city, the center’s director issued rules in 2002 to address
safety concerns and other matters. Among other things, street performers were required to obtain
permits and wear badges. After members of the public filed numerous complaints of threatening
behavior by street performer and balloon artist Michael Berger, Seattle Center staff cited Berger
for several rules violations. He filed a suit in a federal district court against the city and others,
alleging, in part, that the rules violated his free speech rights under the First Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution. The court issued a judgment in the plaintiff’s favor. The city appealed to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

ISSUE
Did the rules issued by the Seattle Center under the city’s authority meet the requirements for
valid restrictions on speech under the First Amendment?

DECISION
Yes. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision of the lower court and
remanded the case for further proceedings. “Such content neutral and narrowly tailored rules ***
must be upheld.” A–1

REASON
The court concluded first that the rules requiring permits and badges were “content neutral.”
Time, place, and manner restrictions do not violate the First Amendment if they burden all
expression equally and do not allow officials to treat different messages differently. In this case,
the rules met this test and thus did not discriminate based on content. The court also concluded
that the rules were “narrowly tailored” to “promote a substantial government interest that would
be achieved less effectively” otherwise. With the rules, the city was trying to “reduce territorial
disputes among performers, deter patron harassment, and facilitate the identification and
apprehension of offending performers.” This was pursuant to the valid governmental objective of
protecting the safety and convenience of the other performers and the public generally. The
public’s complaints about Berger and others showed that unregulated street performances posed
a threat to these interests. The court was “satisfied that the city’s permit scheme was designed to
further valid governmental objectives.”

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy