A Supreme Court Showdown: Preacher vs. Town Ordinance
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to weigh in on a significant case involving First Amendment rights as it considers reinstating a preacher’s challenge against a Mississippi ordinance. This ordinance, enacted by the town of Brandon, restricts demonstrations outside of a popular amphitheater.
On Thursday morning, the Supreme Court announced it would hear oral arguments in the case Gabriel Olivier v. Brandon, Mississippi, et al, according to a miscellaneous order. The controversy revolves around the town’s restrictions on protests near the amphitheater, effective from three hours prior to an event until one hour afterward.
The First Liberty Institute, alongside law firm Gibson Dunn, is representing Gabriel Olivier, the preacher challenging the ordinance. Kelly Shackelford, President of the First Liberty Institute, expressed support for the Supreme Court’s decision, stating, “Every American has First Amendment rights to free speech; and every American has a right to their day in court.”
Brandon’s amphitheater, which opened in 2018, is an open-air venue that can host over 8,500 people and regularly features ticketed events. According to Ordinance § 50-45, individuals and groups protesting within the designated “protest area” face several restrictions. This includes limitations on noise levels, prohibited items such as lasers and loudspeakers, and the requirement for demonstrators to carry photo identification.
Olivier asserts that the protest zone’s distance from the amphitheater’s crowds made it impossible to be heard, leading to his arrest for attempting to relocate closer. Following his arrest and fine, Olivier sued, arguing the ordinance was unconstitutional. His case was initially dismissed by a district court and subsequently by a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with further appeal denied by the full court.
The First Liberty Institute argues that Olivier’s lawsuit was not evaluated on its merits, criticizing the lower court’s deference to Supreme Court precedent that limits the ability of convicted individuals to file suit against authorities. Meanwhile, a separate challenge to the ordinance by Olivier’s acquaintance, Spring Siders, was also ruled against by the 5th Circuit last December, with Circuit Judge Jacques L. Wiener, Jr., stating the ordinance was “narrowly tailored” to serve public safety needs.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between municipal regulation and individual rights, with the Supreme Court now poised to make a potentially landmark decision.
This article was originally written by www.christianpost.com
