On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S. Ct. 2218 (2015), finding an Arizona town’s sign ordinance that imposed inconsistent regulations on different types of temporary outdoor signs an unconstitutional content-based regulation of speech. The Supreme Court’s decision is significant because it has redefined for local municipalities the manner in which, and to what extent, they can regulate different categories of “visual speech” through zoning and other ordinances before infringing upon an individual or an entity’s First Amendment rights.
Like many municipalities, the town of Gilbert enacted a sign ordinance intended to prohibit confusing, distracting and unsafe signs within the town and to otherwise ensure that proposed signs are compatible with, and do not detract from, the town’s aesthetics.
