{"title":"最小内容歧视:标志-法令豁免的棘手问题","authors":"Marc Rohr","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2392631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Municipal sign ordinances commonly embody exemptions for various categories defined by the content of the signs - or are they? Some courts find impermissible content discrimination in this situation, while others - heavily influenced by the Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Hill v. Colorado- do not. This article explores the case law in this area (including the effect of other Supreme Court decisions, most notably City of Ladue v. Gilleo), and suggest a more flexible and realistic approach to the de minimis content discrimination at issue in these cases.","PeriodicalId":344803,"journal":{"name":"Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DeMinimis Content Discrimination: The Vexing Matter of Sign-Ordinance Exemptions\",\"authors\":\"Marc Rohr\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2392631\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Municipal sign ordinances commonly embody exemptions for various categories defined by the content of the signs - or are they? Some courts find impermissible content discrimination in this situation, while others - heavily influenced by the Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Hill v. Colorado- do not. This article explores the case law in this area (including the effect of other Supreme Court decisions, most notably City of Ladue v. Gilleo), and suggest a more flexible and realistic approach to the de minimis content discrimination at issue in these cases.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2392631\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2392631","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
市政标志条例通常包含由标志内容定义的各种类别的豁免-或者它们是吗?在这种情况下,一些法院认为内容歧视是不允许的,而另一些法院——受到最高法院2000年希尔诉科罗拉多州案判决的严重影响——则不这样认为。本文探讨了这一领域的判例法(包括其他最高法院判决的影响,最著名的是Ladue City v. Gilleo),并提出了一种更灵活、更现实的方法来处理这些案件中存在争议的最低限度内容歧视。
DeMinimis Content Discrimination: The Vexing Matter of Sign-Ordinance Exemptions
Municipal sign ordinances commonly embody exemptions for various categories defined by the content of the signs - or are they? Some courts find impermissible content discrimination in this situation, while others - heavily influenced by the Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Hill v. Colorado- do not. This article explores the case law in this area (including the effect of other Supreme Court decisions, most notably City of Ladue v. Gilleo), and suggest a more flexible and realistic approach to the de minimis content discrimination at issue in these cases.