Page:Reed v. Town of Gilbert.pdf/3

Rh

The Ninth Circuit also erred in concluding that the Sign Code was not content based because it made only speaker-based and event-based distinctions. The Code's categories are not speaker basedthe restrictions for political, ideological, and temporary event signs apply equally no matter who sponsors them. And even if the sign categories were speaker based, that would not automatically render the law content neutral. Rather, “laws favoring some speakers over others demand strict scrutiny when the legislature's speaker preference reflects a content preference.” Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC, 512 U. S. 622, 658. This same analysis applies to event-based distinctions. Pp. 165–171.

(d) The Sign Code's content-based restrictions do not survive strict scrutiny because the Town has not demonstrated that the Code's differentiation between temporary directional signs and other types of signs furthers a compelling governmental interest and is narrowly tailored to that end. See Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, 564 U. S. 721, 734. Assuming that the Town has a compelling interest in preserving its aesthetic appeal and traffic safety, the Code's distinctions are highly underinclusive. The Town cannot claim that placing strict limits on temporary directional signs is necessary to beautify the Town when other types of signs create the same problem. See Discovery Network, supra, at 425. Nor has it shown that temporary directional signs pose a greater threat to public safety than ideological or political signs. Pp. 171–172.

(e) This decision will not prevent governments from enacting effective sign laws. The Town has ample content-neutral options available to resolve problems with safety and aesthetics, including regulating size, building materials, lighting, moving parts, and portability. And the Town may be able to forbid postings on public property, so long as it does so in an evenhanded, content-neutral manner. See Members of City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U. S. 789, 817. An ordinance narrowly tailored to the challenges of protecting the safety of pedestrians, drivers, and passengerse. g., warning signs marking hazards on private property or signs directing trafficmight also survive strict scrutiny. Pp. 172–173.

707 F. 3d 1057, reversed and remanded.

, delivered the opinion of the Court, in which, and , , , and , joined. , filed a concurring opinion, in which and, joined, post, p. 174. , filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, post, p. 175. , filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which and, joined, post, p. 179.