Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Maze finds that challengers to a city's ban on billboards lack standing because they did not argue that the ban is unconstitutional. The ban applies to all billboards, regardless of content, so it was not a prior restraint on speech. City officials denied permit and variance applications because of the ban and were not using unconstitutionally unbridled discretion. The challengers' facial argument also failed due to the absence of discretionary decision-making by officials.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.