Stahl v. City of St. Louis, Mo., No. 10-3761 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff was arrested under the authority of St. Louis Ordinance 17.16.270, which prohibits conduct, including speech, that has the consequence of impeding pedestrians or vehicular traffic. After the City dropped the charges against him, Plaintiff brought this action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 as a facial challenge to the St. Louis ordinance. The district court granted the City's motion for summary judgment, finding the ordinance to be a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the ordinance was unconstitutional on its face because it did not provide fair notice of what conduct was prohibited, and it excessively chilled protected speech.
Court Description: Civil case - civil rights. St. Louis City Ordinance Sec. 17.16.270 which prohibits conduct, including speech, that has the consequence of impeding pedestrian or vehicular traffic is unconstitutional on its face because it does not provide fair notice of what conduct is prohibited and because it excessively chills protected speech; district court's order finding the ordinance to be a content-neutral time, place and manner restriction is reversed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.