Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
A group that wished to picket in front of a business owner's home because of the business owner's employment practices challenged the ordinance as unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
A city ordinance prohibited individuals from picketing in residential neighborhoods unless the picketing related to the neighborhood zoning requirements. This exception to the ordinance was adopted in response to local citizens' strong views about proposed rezoning of residential neighborhoods.
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. As explained above, the ordinance is a content-based regulation of speech, not a content-neutral regulation of speech.
B is incorrect. Although picketing is conduct, it is considered «expressive conduct» because: (i) the picketer intends to communicate a message; and (ii) the audience is likely to understand the message. Expressive conduct is protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. As stated above, the ordinance is a content-based regulation of speech, which must satisfy strict scrutiny, a burden which the city would be unable to meet.
C is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. For the reasons explained above, the applicable standard of review is strict scrutiny, and the ordinance would not pass this standard.