Quoting Neal Krasnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Mar 31, 2004, at 10:20 PM, mike skoglund wrote: > > > On 3/31/04 9:45 PM, "Neal Krasnoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> This is exactly why I <do not> trust the Judiciary. I thought > >> soliciting money for personal gain is .... commercial speech. > > > > Regardless whether it's commercial speech -- an argument the city > > attorney > > doesn't appear to have made -- commercial speech still falls under the > > First > > Amendment unless the government asserts a substantial interest, the > > regulation directly advances that asserted interest, and the > > regulation is > > not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest. > > The government is the People - most of whom are not in the judicial > caste.
Regardless of who acts in government or the social contract ostensibly creating such government -- and Minneapolis was created by law, not by some sort of Lockean meeting of the minds -- if the city wants to regulate speech, it needs to assert an interest that justfies such a regulation. > Let's deposit some hustlers from downtown in <her> neighborhood > and see what happens to substantial government interest. What does that have to do with anything? Is the First Amendment trumped by NIMBY in your neighborhood? > Time to enact an Aggressive Panhandling statute. Do you understand that the Minneapolis ordinance was *not* an aggressive pandhandling statute? According to the Pioneer Press, here's the Minneapolis ordinance: "No person, in any public or private place, shall beg from strangers for money or other property, other than solicitation for recognized charities." Compare this to the model Agressive Panhandling Statute, which concentrates not on SPEECH but on aggressive, intimidating, or harassing CONDUCT: http://www.communityinterest.org/backgrounders/panhandling.htm # Section 1. Definitions # For purpose of this section: # A. "Aggressive manner" shall mean: # 1. Approaching or speaking to a person, or following a person before, # during or after soliciting if that conduct is intended or is likely to # cause a reasonable person to fear bodily harm to oneself or to another, # or damage to or loss of property or otherwise be intimidated into giving # money or other thing of value; # 2. Continuing to solicit from a person after the person has given a # negative response to such soliciting; # 3. Intentionally touching or causing physical contact with another person # without that person's consent in the course of soliciting; # 4. Intentionally blocking or interfering with the safe or free passage # of a pedestrian or vehicle by any means, including unreasonably causing # a pedestrian or vehicle operator to take evasive action to avoid physical # contact; # 5. Using violent or threatening gestures toward a person solicited; # 6. Following the person being solicited, with the intent of asking that # person for money or other things of value; # 7. Speaking in a volume unreasonably loud under the circumstances; # 8. Soliciting money from anyone who is waiting in line for entry to a # building or for another purpose. > >> If the New York case she cited is the same I'm thinking of, her > >> "panhandling as protected speech" theory was laughingly overturned on > >> appeal. > > > > What's the cite? > > > > I was thinking of the subway case: Young v. New York City Transit > Authority, 903 F. 2d 146 (CA2 1990). You realize the analysis of that case turned on the fact the panhandling was being done on subways, whereas the Minneapolis statute reaches public streets and private spaces? It *certainly* doesn't support your claim that panhandling is not protected speech. Mike Skoglund New York NY (where there are subways) // Minneapolis (where there are not) REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
