FAYETTEVILLE -- A Rogers anti-panhandling ordinance is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced, a federal judge ruled Monday.
The ordinance sought to prohibit people from approaching cars in traffic on city streets. U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks found it to be a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech of not only panhandlers but others, such as people handing out leaflets, political activists and those who choose to engage in protected free speech in the city.
Legal lingo
Unconstitutional
Refers to a government action which is in violation of the authority and rights defined and granted in the government’s constitution. Most constitutions set forth the powers of governments, so that the constitution normally applies only to government actions. An action of state or federal governments, through any of its agencies and bodies, is subject to constitutional limits, and only governments can violate the nation’s constitution.
Source: uslegal.com
"It must be acknowledged that panhandling is often perceived as a nuisance and the presence of panhandlers on a city's streets reminds its residents that poverty lurks in their midst and that not all can afford a meal, a place to live or gas for their cars," Brooks wrote in his opinion. "Certainly, there is merit in the city's argument that panhandlers and motorists alike may be in greater danger of being involved in accidents and suffering injuries due to the fact that engaging in speech activities in the public roads may be distracting -- and, in fact is meant to be distracting."
"But, the way the city has chosen to address its panhandling 'problem' is totally unsupported by any research; does not address the source of any identified traffic safety concerns; and, fails to justify the imposition of a sweeping and unprincipled ban on activities that incidentally burden free speech."
Brooks said if the city law were to be enacted, it would cut a "wide and destructive swath" through the rights of panhandlers and others because it would curtail, if not eliminate, free speech on the streets of Rogers, from the busiest intersections to the quietest cul-de-sacs at all times of the day or night.
Brooks noted the city reworked the ordinance several times and eventually removed references to the soliciting of money or contributions from motor vehicles by pedestrians. But, Brooks said a reasonable person could still extrapolate that, even in the latest version, the city's true intent remained the same: to target and eliminate solicitation speech from public roadways.
Brooks said he wasn't convinced the ordinance was a mere traffic regulation to protect pedestrians and motorists, as the city argued. The city didn't enforce the law while the lawsuit was pending.
The lawsuit was filed last summer by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas on behalf of Glynn Dilbeck and Shannon Cook. It named Hayes Minor, in his official capacity as police chief. Fort Smith and Hot Springs were also sued over panhandling ordinances.
Before that, a federal judge in Little Rock invalidated part of a state law that banned public begging, saying it was unconstitutional.
NW News on 09/25/2018