Dave Chandler Daniel Hayes Cheryl St. John Robert G. Prokop v. The City of Arvada, Colorado

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that municipality had a \compelling interest in policing the integrity of its petition process\
• holding that city residency requirement was “substantially broader than necessary” to ensure the integrity of the petition process in part because the city could instead require circulators to submit to jurisdiction of the city for subpoena enforcement
• holding that this court is free to affirm a district court's decision on any grounds for which there is a record sufficient to permit conclusions of law, even grounds not relied upon by the district court
• holding that city residency requirement was “substantially broader than necessary” to ensure the integrity of the petition process in part because the city could instead require circulators to submit to jurisdiction of the city for subpoena enforcement
• holding that Appellee failed to prove narrow tailoring because it could achieve its “compelling interest in policing its petition process” by requiring “the prospective circulator [to] agree to submit to [its] jurisdiction . . . for the purpose of subpoena enforcement”
• recognizing First Amendment protection for what plaintiff “believes” to be its most effective means of communication

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).