Will Cramer's truck that was ticketed because he put a "For Sale" sign in the window.
Will Cramer did something simple that many Americans do every day: he put a “For Sale” sign in the window of his car. The 1987 Chevy truck was parked in front of his home in Nazareth, Pennsylvania where it usually was. Two weeks later, he found a ticket in his window.
Will had no idea that his town made it illegal to park a car on the street for the purpose of selling a car. And when he read the text of the ordinance, it struck him as both wrong when applied to his situation and a violation of his First Amendment rights.
So Will contested his ticket in court. First, he maintained that he was going to park his car in the same place whether or not it had the sign in the window. That meant that he did not park his car for the purpose of selling it.
Second, he argued that his sign was First Amendment protected speech. The government cannot restrict someone’s speech unless it has a very good reason. The officer who gave Will the ticket testified that he could not identify any harm from the sign or any public benefit due to its removal.
Unfortunately, the judge did not seriously consider either of Will’s arguments and required him to pay $123.75 in fines and court costs. But that is not the end of the story.
Will has another car he wants to sell by placing a “For Sale” sign in the window, but this time he has the help of the Institute for Justice, which has argued free speech cases for decades and just had a First Amendment case at the Supreme Court. Last week, Will sued the borough of Nazareth in federal court.
Nazareth doesn’t ban signs in car windows. If you have a sign that says, “Go Eagles!,” you won’t get a ticket. Nazareth also doesn’t ban commercial speech on vehicles. If you are a plumber and you have your car painted with your business name and phone number, you are in the clear.
The town just bans one specific message: “For Sale.” That runs directly counter to the idea that the government cannot discriminate against some messages while allowing others.
The officer could not come up with a reason why signs harmed the public and the town solicitor could not remember why the law was enacted. However, perhaps the ordinance was passed because of worries that cars for sale would be left essentially abandoned on city streets. But the city has every right to decide where people can park on city streets and how long they can leave their car. Will was continuing to drive his car while he was trying to sell it and he was allowed to park in front of his home.
Nazareth isn’t the only place in Pennsylvania where “For Sale” signs are banned. Philadelphia also outlaws the practice. Absurdly, the fine in Philly is $301. That’s multiple times higher than parking offenses that impede traffic. Double-parking or parking at a bus stop downtown is a $76 offense. The highly dangerous practice of stopping on railroad tracks is just a $31 ticket.
Will is not the first American to challenge one of these bans. In 2007, a federal appeals court struck down Cincinnati’s ban. But the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal and Pennsylvania is in a different judicial circuit. Maybe one day the Supreme Court Justices could hear arguments like those Will made in front of the municipal judge last year.
A fine of just over a hundred dollars might seem like a small thing to some people, but our free speech rights are worth defending over even minor violations by the government. Imagine if the government could ban political bumper stickers or signs from candidates belonging to just one party. Will’s fight is a worthy one.
