Activist Steve Argue was arrested twice under the law in June and July 2003. He was arrested staffing a joint political table of the Peace and Freedom Party and Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom.

A number of police began to time and monitor Steve Argue‚s political activities as soon as he erected the literature table on the sidewalk of Pacific Avenue. When an hour was up the police demanded Argue take down his table or face arrest. Argue refused the police orders saying that City law was in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Twice, on June 23 and July 6th, he was handcuffed and taken to jail with literature and signs taken in as evidence.

Today Judge Barton agreed with the argument put forward by Steve Argue‚s attorney, Tony Bole, that the law is unconstitutional on the grounds that it discriminates against non-commercial „displays‰ in favor of commercial displays. Those setting up commercial displays can attain a license and sell their products all day while there is no such avenue for non-commercial displays such as free literature.

Steve Argue stated, „This is a victory in defense of free speech rights. Limiting political tabling to one hour is an overbroad restriction on free speech that brings police scrutiny, intimidation, and enforcement in against a constitutionally protected activity. While the legal arguments used to overturn this law are not quite the same as why I deeply oppose it, those arguments had the desired outcome of overturning the law. Any further attempts by the City Council to pass new laws against free speech will be met with the same kind of opposition and civil disobedience.‰

This was not Steve Argue‚s first legal victory against the Santa Cruz City government on constitutional grounds. In 1998 Argue was brutalized, arrested, and held in jail for four days for selling an alternative newspaper. In 2002 Federal Judge Ware ruled that this was not only a violation of constitutional rights, but that the way the City government was trying to defend itself shows that it is City policy to violate constitutional rights.

Steve Argue points out, „The pattern here is clear. In this most recent case the Santa Cruz City government has paid the bill for prosecuting the case because the DA‚s office didn‚t want it. But above and beyond the cost to tax payers, democracy is undermined when the government sends out the police in attempts to silence critics. This is a victory for the free exchange of ideas in Santa Cruz, an essential element in the struggle against creeping tyranny.‰


******
Unconstitutional Law:

5.43.020 (Non-Commercial Use of City Streets and Sidewalks for Sales and Solicitation)

(2) No person shall allow a display device to remain in the same location on the sidewalk for a period of time exceeding one hour. After one
hour the person who placed the display device on the sidewalk shall not place a display device on the sidewalk within 100 feet of the original display device location. After one hour the person who placed the display device shall not place a display device in the original display device location, or within 100 feet of the original display device location, for twenty-four hours. (3) No person shall be cited under
this section unless he or she has first been notified by a public officer or Downtown Host that he or she is in violation of the prohibition in this section, and thereafter continues the violation.