Gabriel Oliver v. City of Brandon, Mississippi

Jackson, Mississippi, civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff seeking to enjoin the enforcement of an ordinance prohibiting street preaching near a public amphitheater.

Olivier is a street
preacher in Mississippi—a Christian who believes that
sharing his religious views with fellow citizens is an im-
portant part of exercising his faith. His vocation sometimes
took him to the sidewalks near an amphitheater in the City
of Brandon, where he could find sizable audiences attend-
ing events. Olivier was apparently not the only speaker at-
tracted to that area, and the activities there caused some
disruption. In 2019, the City adopted an ordinance requir-
ing all individuals or groups engaging in “protests” or
“demonstrations,” at around the time events were sched-
uled, to stay within a “designated protest area.” Supp. to
App. 70 (capitalization deleted). On his next trip to the am-
phitheater, in 2021, Olivier checked out that area, but
found it too remote for communicating his message. So he
returned, along with his signs and loudspeaker, to the side-
walk fronting the amphitheater. And there he was arrested
by the Brandon police chief for violating the city ordinance.
The next month, Olivier pleaded no contest in municipal
court. The court imposed a $304 fine; one year of probation;
and ten days of imprisonment, to be served only if, during
his probation, he again violated the ordinance. Olivier did
not appeal, paid the fine, and served no prison time.
Because he still wanted to preach near the amphitheater,
Olivier’s next step was to file this lawsuit in federal court,
naming the City and its police chief as defendants. The suit
is brought under §1983, which authorizes claims against
state and local officials for the “deprivation of any rights”
secured by the Constitution. Olivier’s complaint alleges
that the city ordinance violates the Free Speech Clause of
the First Amendment by consigning him (and other speak-
ers) to the amphitheater’s out-of-the-way protest area. The
complaint seeks, as a remedy, a declaration that the ordi-
nance infringes his (and other speakers’) First Amendment
rights and an injunction preventing city officials from en-
forcing the ordinance in the future.

The District Court agreed with the City’s understanding
of Heck, and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit af-
firmed on the same reasoning.

Reversed

See: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-993_10n2.pdf