Davis

Davis v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
135 F. Supp. 3d 1053·2015 WL 5655057·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129494
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 2015Case No. 15-cv-04336-RSCalifornia2,539 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Seeborg, J.

ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY RELIEF

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs George Davis and Oxane “Gypsy” Taube are self-described political activists for “body freedom” — a cause that includes advocating for rights to public nudity. Plaintiffs wish to hold a public march on San Francisco city streets this coming Saturday to protest the enactment and enforcement of a municipal ordinance regulating public nudity. Believing their intended march to come within the definition of a "parade”; under another municipal ordinance, plaintiffs • applied for a parade permit pursuant to that ordinance.

Through his delegates, the San Francis^ co Chief of Police denied plaintiffs a parade permit, explaining that in light of the fact only 100 or fewer participants were expected,, the march could be .carried out on city sidewalks. The Chief asserted the planned march therefore was not a “parade” under the ordinance, and would not require a permit.

In this action, plaintiffs assert the ordinance governing parades is constitutionally infirm on its face and/or as applied in a number of different respects. Plaintiffs’ pending motion for a restraining order that would compel the City to issue a parade permit,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.