Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach, 621 F. 3d 1051 (2010), was a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that tattoos, the process of tattooing, and the business of tattooing are pure expressive activities that are fully protected by the First Amendment's free speech clause. The court determined that the process of tattooing constitutes pure expressive activity rather than conduct that is sufficiently imbued with elements of communication. As pure expressive activity, the process of tattooing can only be regulated by a proper time, place, and manner restriction. The court found in Anderson v. The City of Hermosa Beach that the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code banning tattoo parlors within the city was not a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction because the regulation was not narrowly tailored to meet the government's interest and the regulation did not leave open ample alternative avenues for the same messages to be conveyed.
Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach | |
---|---|
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
Full case name | Johnny Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach. |
Argued | May 7, 2010 |
Decided | September 9, 2010 (2010-09-09) |
Case history | |
Appealed from | The United States District Court for the Central District of California |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | John T. Noonan, Richard R. Clifton, and Jay S. Bybee |
Case opinions | |
Decision by | Judge Jay S. Bybee |
Concurrence | Judge John T. Noonan |
Laws applied | |
Hermosa Beach Municipal Code § 17.06.070 | |
Area of law | |
First Amendment Free Speech |