The Leavitt’s Country Bakery case made headlines across the country because it was seen as a First Amendment fight. But when the cookies crumbled, the court’s ruling was hardly a landmark moment for free speech.
In a 23-page decision, federal Judge Joseph Laplante sided with Leavitt’s — not because of any sweeping constitutional principle, but because the town was inconsistent in how it applied its sign ordinance specifically to Leavitt’s. He called it a “deeply irrational way.”
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm(96E96C E96 A2:?E:?8 23@G6 {62G:EE’D 6?EC2?46 56A:4E:?8 >F77:?D 2?5 5@F89?FED :D 2 D:8? @C 2 >FC2= 925 =:EE=6 E@ 5@ H:E9 E96 ;F586’D 564:D:@?] x? 724E[ 96 D2:5 :E 2AA62CD E@ 36 4@>>6C4:2= DA6649 W2 D:8?X]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQDaQm(9:=6 E96 564:D:@? 56=G6D 566A :?E@ =682= H665D[ H:E9 ?F>6C@FD 4:E2E:@?Dk^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQDbQm7C@> A2DE 4@FCE 42D6D[ E9:D A2DD286k^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQD`QmDk^DA2?mkDA2? 4=2DDlQDbQm66>D E@ DF> :Ek^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQDaQmFAik^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm“%96 4@FCE 96C6 5@6D ?@E CF=6 E92E E96 D:8? 4@56 :D F?=2H7F= @C F?4@?DE:EFE:@?2= 2D HC:EE6?] }6:E96C 5@6D :E CF=6 E92E r@?H2J 4@F=5 ?@E =2H7F==J C68F=2E6 E96 {62G:EE’D 5:DA=2J[ @C E92E E96 5:DA=2J 5@6D ?@E G:@=2E6 E96 D:8? 4@56 2D HC:EE6?] }@C 5@6D E96 4@FCE CF=6 E92E E96 {62G:EE’D 5:DA=2J :D ?@E 4@>>6C4:2= DA6649 W2D :E 46CE2:?=J 2AA62CD E@ 36X[ E92E >F?:4:A2=:E:6D >2J ?@E C68F=2E6 4@>>6C4:2= D:8?286 =:<6 E96 5:DA=2J 2E :DDF6 96C6[ @C E92E E96 D:8? 4@56 ?646DD2C:=J :>A=:42E6D 2?J A2CE:4F=2C =6G6= @C E:6C @7 u:CDE p>6?5>6?E D4CFE:?J] %96 4@FCE CF=6D @?=J E92E r@?H2J’D 2AA=:42E:@? @7 :ED D:8? 4@56[ 2?5 DA64:7:42==J :ED 6?7@C46>6?E @7 E96 D:8? 4@56 E@ E96 {62G:EE’D D:8? :? E96 A2CE:4F=2C >2??6C :E 6>A=@J65 :? E9:D 42D6[ 5@6D ?@E H:E9DE2?5 2?J =6G6= @7 4@?DE:EFE:@?2= D4CFE:?J]”k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmw@H[ E96?[ 5:5 r@?H2J =@D6n ~?6 :?E6CAC6E2E:@? :D E96 E@H? H2D D:>A=J @FE\=2HJ6C65] {62G:EE’D =682= 4@F?D6=[ DA64:2=:DED :? u:CDE p>6?5>6?E :DDF6D[ DE:E4965 E@86E96C 4@>>6?ED >256 @G6C 2 4@FA=6 @7 J62CD 3J r@?H2J’D K@?:?8 @77:46C 2?5 >6>36CD @7 E96 K@?:?8 3@2C5 @7 25;FDE>6?E E92E 56>@?DEC2E65 — E@ E96 ;F586 2E =62DE — :?4@?D:DE6?E =@8:4 :? 6?7@C46>6?E]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm~?6 6I2>A=6 :D H96? E96 K@?:?8 @77:46C D2:5 E96 D:8? H2D :==682= 3642FD6 :E 56A:4E65 2 4@>>6C4:2= >6DD286[ H96?[ :? 724E[ E96 @C5:?2?46 2E E96 E:>6 255C6DD65 @?=J E96 D:K6 2?5 4@?DECF4E:@? @7 D:8?D — ?@E 4@?E6?E]kDA2? 4=2DDlQpAA=6\4@?G6CE65\DA246Qm k^DA2?mk^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQDbQmqFE :? @FC G:6H[ E96 K@?:?8 @77:46C[ 2?5 E96 +qp 7@C E92Ek^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQDcQm>2EE6C[k^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQDaQmH6C6 4@CC64E :? E96k^DA2?mkDA2? 4=2DDlQDcQm:C @A:?:@? E92E E9k^DA2?mkDA2? 4=2DDlQDaQm6 D:8? G:@=2E65 E96k^DA2?m kDA2? 4=2DDlQDbQm@C5:?2?46j E96J ;FDE AC6D6?E65 E96:C =@8:4 92>92?565=Jk^DA2?mkDA2? 4=2DDlQDaQm]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm*6D[ {62G:EE’D H@? 2?5 E96 E@H? =@DE[ 3FE :E :D E96 4@>>F?:EJ E92E DF776CD] yFDE =:<6 E96 2C8F>6?ED @G6C E96 ?2>6D @7 r@?H2J’D 6=6>6?E2CJ D49@@=D[ E9:D 3642>6 2 D:EF2E:@? H96C6 H6==\:?E6?E:@?65 A6@A=6 5F8 :? 2?5 =@DE A6CDA64E:G6]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm*6D[ E96C6 H6C6 >:DE2<6D 2?5 >:D;F58>6?ED — 2?5 ?@E ;FDE 7C@> E96 E@H?] {62G:EE’D :D?’E 3=2>6=6DD 6:E96C]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm%96 H9@=6 E9:?8 DE2CE65 H:E9 E96 D49@@=’D 2CE 56A2CE>6?E] xE H2D 2 8C62E :562 2?5 2 G2=F23=6 6IA6C:6?46 7@C E96 DEF56?ED] qFE :E H@F=5 92G6 366? 6G6? >@C6 G2=F23=6 :7 D@>6@?6 925 6IA=2:?65 E@ E96 DEF56?ED E92E E96C6 2C6 E@H? CF=6D 23@FE D:8?286] $@>6@?6 — 2?5 E92E :?4=F56D E96 @H?6C @7 E96 32<6CJ — D9@F=5 92G6 C624965 @FE E@ E96 E@H? 367@C6 :E H6?E FA] x? 724E[ E96 E@H? 5:5?’E <?@H 23@FE E96 AC@;64E F?E:= :E H2D :? A=246 2?5 C6A@CE65 :? E9:D ?6HDA2A6C]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmp?5 E96? E96C6’D E96 E@H?’D C@=6] ~?46 E96 D:8? H2D :? A=246[ 4@F=5?’E E96 D6=64E>6? 92G6 E@=5 DE277 E@ 8:G6 E96 @H?6C 2 9625D\FA E92E :E D66>65 E@ 36 @FE @7 4@>A=:2?46 — 3FE E96? 9:E A2FD6 F?E:= E96J 4@F=5 E2<6 2 4=@D6C =@@< 2E E96 @C5:?2?46n tDA64:2==J D:?46 2 D:>:=2C D:EF2E:@? H2D 3C6H:?8 2E $6EE=6CD vC66? H96C6 H:?8D 76DE@@?65 H:E9 D9@6D A2:?E65 @? 2 H2== 925 366? FA 7@C J62CD]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm%96 C62=:EJ :D E92E r@?H2J’D D:8? 6?7@C46>6?E 92D 366? >6DDJ 7@C 2 =@?8 E:>6 — 2?5 7@C 8@@5 C62D@?] u=28D[ 32==@@?D[ D2?5H:49 3@2C5D 2?5 ?@H >FC2=D E92E 5@F3=6 2D 25D — 4C62E:G6 3FD:?6DD @H?6CD 2C6 2=H2JD 7:?5:?8 H2JD E@ 86E 2EE6?E:@?[ 2?5 E96 CF=6D 92G6?’E <6AE FA]k^DA2?mk^Am
kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmw:?5D:89E :D a_^a_[ @7 4@FCD6] qFE 2D H:E9 E96 D49@@= C6?2>:?8 4@?EC@G6CDJ[ E9:D H2D 2 >@>6?E E92E 42==65 7@C D@>6 C67=64E:@?] $@>6@?6 ?66565 E@ DE6A 324< 2?5 =@@< 2E E96 3:8 A:4EFC6 — ?@E ;FDE E@ 2G@:5 H2DE:?8 E:>6 2?5 E2IA2J6CD’ >@?6J[ 3FE E@ <66A r@?H2J 7C@> >2<:?8 ?2E:@?2= ?6HD 7@C 2== E96 HC@?8 C62D@?D]k^DA2?mk^Am
(2) comments
As the owner of Leavitt's I'll have to point out and disagree with a few "facts". 1st- there was no need to reach out for a sign permit as this was a class art project. The was no art ordinance, which the town subsequently put one in place specifically because they knew they were wrong about this. 2. The judge did say that town unconstitutionally enforced the ordinance. While such a broad ordinance in itself isn't unconstitutional, the board can not pick and choose against who they want to enforce it against. Which is certainly what they did to me. 3. This could have all been avoided in the first zoning meeting, the zoning board "voted" it wasn't art. I specifically asked what my options were if I wanted to keep the student art. I was quickly told to apply for a variance. When the town immediately denied the variance. I again asked my options. They said I could appeal their decision. I said "hold on then, can I appeal your first decision that it wasn't art?" I was told their ruling had to be appealed in 30 days and it had been 38 days. I explained that I specifically asked what my options were and they never told me I could appeal their first decision. The response was "our lawyers told us we were under no obligation to tell you what you could do". So even when I specifically asked options, I believe they intentionally failed to tell me I could appeal their initial decision that it wasn't art knowing it would be tough for them.
Glad to add the other perspective, I'd hate for this to contribute to misinformation and partial stories told like so many other news sources do today.
Local Attorney Jake Crabbs summed it up very well saying “Yesterday’s decision underscores that conscientiousness and good faith ALONE are not good enough. The town must — and we expect that they will going forward — respect citizens’ constitutional rights and apply all its ordinances fairly and evenly.”
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.