(CN) — A Seattle street preacher won a case before the Ninth Circuit on Thursday in a ruling that prohibits Seattle police from arresting him for reading the Bible at public events even when it incites hostile reactions.
“Curtailing speech based on the listeners’ reaction is rarely — if ever — the least restrictive means to achieve the government’s interest in safety,” U.S. Circuit Judge Jay S. Bybee, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the order. He was joined by Senior U.S. Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown, a Bill Clinton appointee, and Daniel A. Bress, a Donald Trump appointee.
The street preacher in the case, Matthew Meinecke, was arrested after reading Bible passages at two public events in 2022.
One of the events Meinecke attended was an abortion rally held in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on June 24, 2022. In his original civil rights lawsuit, Meinecke said that — after an hour of walking on a sidewalk with a sign while reading Biblical verses and handing out literature — protesters surrounded him, and one took his Bible away.
Undeterred, Meinecke began reading from a second Bible. After 15 minutes, he said a different person tore up his Bible pages before a group of so-called Antifa members carried him to the other side of the street.
Meinecke then moved 30 feet away. Before long, he said a different protester knocked him down and took his shoes away.
When the police responded, Meinecke claimed that they asked him to move across the street. He did not.
The Seattle PrideFest — the other event referenced in Meinecke's complaint — is an annual LGBTQ+ pride event.
During PrideFest on June 26, 2022, Meinecke said he spent most of the day preaching without issue — though he said one person poured water on his Bible and a few others yelled at him or barked like a dog.
Ten officers eventually approached Meinecke. He said that this time, they asked him to leave the park. He did not.
On both occasions, Seattle police arrested Meinecke under a city ordinance that punishes citizens for disobeying police orders to stop a behavior (even if it’s protected speech) when it risks injury to any person in the area.
This time, place and manner restriction prompted Meinecke to sue the city and its police department in March 2023.
In the suit, Meinecke requested an injunction preventing the Seattle police from further arresting him for his preaching. U.S. District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, a Jimmy Carter appointee, denied that motion in June 2023.
According to Rothstein, the Seattle police never asked Meinecke to leave the public events — only that he move a safer distance away to prevent conflict or risk arrest. The police’s response to Meinecke’s resistance was neutral, the judge decided — though a Ninth Circuit panel ruled otherwise after an appeal hearing in early February.
“Even assuming that the officers simply instructed Meinecke to cross the street, their directions burdened Meinecke’s speech,” Bybee wrote in Thursday's order. “Meinecke had a right, just as those participating in the anti-Dobbs rally or the celebration of PrideFest, to use public sidewalks and streets for the peaceful dissemination of his views.”
Bybee noted that when police single out a nonthreatening speaker for discipline, the government is choosing sides in a debate while using a statute to enforce that decision.
In this case, he said the restriction on speech amounted to what’s called content-based “heckler’s vetoes,” in which opposing party triggers an event that silences a speaker.
“The officers could have required the protestors to take a step back from Meinecke,” Bybee wrote. “They could have called for more officers — as they did after Meinecke was arrested. They could have erected a free speech barricade. They could have warned the protestors that any sort of physical altercation would result in the perpetrators’ arrests. And they could have arrested the individuals who ultimately assaulted Meinecke.”
Since the police did none of those things and failed to cite less restrictive methods of avoiding violence, the panel reasoned that Meinecke established a likelihood of success on his First Amendment claim.
“We reverse the district court and remand with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction consistent with this opinion in favor of Meinecke,” Bybee concluded.
Follow @alannamayhampdx
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
-
$48M for takings April 18, 2024
