Union City Board of Zoning Appeals v. Justice Outdoor Displays, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, although the regulation of profane language in the context of “fighting words” is constitutional, the statute at issue was unconstitutional because it was not “narrowly tailored to protect some vital government interest”
• noting that a more-specific statute should be treated as an exception to a more-general statute
• explaining that city had “not demonstrated that political signs pose a greater danger to the motoring public or detract from the aesthetics of the city any more than other signs, with greater or unlimited durational limitations, permitted in the same zoning districts”
• affirming a superior court’s finding of unconstitutionality of various provisions of a local sign code which were not directly implicated in the underlying appeal from denial of application for variance
• striking down sign ordinances because they 7 imposed content-based restrictions on speech
• superior court found that ordinance violated “the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. I, Sec. I, Par. V of the Georgia Constitution”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).