Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-billboard company’s motion for summary judgment in action alleging that defendant’s zoning laws that regulated construction of outdoor billboards by requiring entities to obtain permits and treating commercial speech differently than noncommercial speech violated its First Amendment rights. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying plaintiff’s request to enjoin substantive sign standards that did not otherwise violate First Amendment, where: (1) unconstitutional aspects of ordinance could be severed from substantive sign standards; and (2) substantive sign standards did not need unconstitutional permit scheme to function. However, Dist. Ct. erred in finding that defendant’s variance procedures that allowed defendant to grant permits for billboard signs that did not technically meet substantive sign standards violated First Amendment. Instant variance procedures were content neutral and were not tantamount to unconstitutional prior restraint on speech, where (1) defendant allowed alternatives for speech as long as billboard was erected within required size, height and setback limitations; and (2) discretion allowed under variance procedures was not central to overarching zoning scheme.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
First Amendment