Missouri asks SCOTUS to review Halloween sign decision
The State of Missouri, dissatisfied with their loss in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, has asked the Supreme Court of the United States to take up the Halloween Sign Ordinance case.
Earlier this year, the brave named registrants and their attorney, Janice Bellucci from ACSOL, successfully challenged a law that required they post a “no candy or treats” sign at their house on Halloween. Now the State wants the Supreme Court to review the Appellate Court’s decision. Here’s why we’re not particularly concerned.
Each Term, the Supreme Court of the United States receives approximately 7,000 to 8,000 petitions for writs of certiorari, yet grants and hears oral argument in only about 60 to 70 cases. That means fewer than 1% of all petitions are accepted for full review. The overwhelming majority of petitions are denied without any comment on the merits.
Is this Halloween sign such a matter of national significance that it’s worthy of the court’s attention, especially in light of the social science showing that there’s no increase in instances of sexual offending on Halloween?!? We think not. We also believe that if, defying the odds, the Court does decide to take it up, the issue is strong enough that the registrants will prevail anyhow.
So if Missouri wants to dig in their heels and fight a nonsensical, useless, Halloween sign ordinance to the Supreme Court, we say good luck with that!
You can read Missouri’s petition for Writ of Certiorari here: Sanderson Halloween Certiorari
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It would actually be good if the Supreme Court took this case, as they’d likely declare it compelled speech and unconstitutional. Free speech is pretty much the #1 right in the Supreme Court’s book.
However, I think it’s very unlikely the Supreme Court takes the case. Missouri is just trying to save face. But in reality, they’re just wasting taxpayer dollars trying to defend an obviously unconstitutional law.
These pious legislators sure do like to attack the first amendment issues by forcing speech.
I know this may sound crazy but I hope SCOTUS takes the case. They should be guided by their own precedent:
1. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
2. Wooley v. Maynard (1977)
3. 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023)
If they do. I could the end the argument for good and possibly give a path forward in the license branding. Of course all this is just my opinion.
Me too I can not decorate at all in my county if SCOTUS took on and a win be law of the land
What is the current legal status of license branding? My state had a bill targeting that this year. It didn’t move forward, but it was concerning nonetheless.
In Florida it’s still not declared unconstitutional.