Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994

Ladue v. Gilleo - The Facts Of The Case, The Lower Courts Rule, The Supreme Court Rules

city residential free speech


City of Ladue, et al.


Margaret P. Gilleo

Petitioner's Claim

That the city of Ladue's ban on residential signs except in ten exempted cases did not violate Margaret Gilleo's First Amendment right to free speech.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Jordan B. Cherrick

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Gerald P. Greiman

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens (writing for the Court), Clarence Thomas

Justices Dissenting



Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

13 June 1994


Upheld the lower court's ruling that the city of Ladue's ban on residential signs did in fact violate Margaret Gilleo's First Amendment right to free speech.


The ruling affirmed the Supreme Court's belief that a city cannot infringe upon the free speech rights of its inhabitants without a compelling reason to do so. In this case the city's desire to reduce clutter in residential areas was found not to be compelling enough to justify a ban on signage.


Ladue v. Gilleo reaffirmed the U.S. Supreme Court's commitment to strict scrutiny of all governmental attempts to restrict free speech. It established a precedent for future cases in which the balance between state regulation of signage and the rights of expression come into conflict.

Related Cases

  • First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978).
  • Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego, 453 U.S. 490 (1981).
  • Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474 (1988).

Further Readings

  • Kennedy, David J. "Residential Associations as State Actors."Yale Law Journal, Vol. 105, no. 3, December 1995, pp. 761-793.
  • Newman, Judith, Mary M. Harrison, and Carolyn Kramer. "A Sign of the Times." People Weekly, March 21, 1994, pp. 115-117.
Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District - Significance, Was The School District Discriminatory?, Federal Court, Further Readings [next] [back] Kingsley v. Kingsley - Significance, A Child As A Person, Improper Parental Comparisons, Impact, Further Readings

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or

Vote down Vote up

about 9 years ago

It's her yard , she can put any sign she feels like in it, DAMN IT!!!