Court’s decision a good sign for the first amendment

Via AZ Central:

9-0. That’s an impressive win for free speech and a small church in Gilbert. A philosophically divided U.S. Supreme Court exhibited rare unanimity in finding that the town violated the First Amendment in the ham-handed way it sought to regulate signs.

It was such a slam-dunk decision you have to wonder how the lower courts got it so wrong. Other cities, in the Valley and across the country, need to take note.

Gilbert’s code differentiates among 23 types of signs that can be erected without a permit. It justifies this as necessary for traffic safety and to preserve the town’s aesthetics. The court had no trouble punching holes in all the town’s arguments.