[Mpls] Saturday Night Live joke on Minneapolis

[David Brauer]

On May 9, 2005, at 12:41 PM, Michael Atherton wrote:

>
> Michael Jensvold wrote:
>
>>  The attempt to regulate panhandlers is a clear
>>  violation of free speech.  What's the difference
>>  between a passive panhandler and the "Would you like
>>  to help defeat George Bush" folks last political
>>  season?  If they can regulate the former the latter is
>>  in danger too.
>
> I'd tend to agree that regulating panhandlers might be
> a violation of free speech, but the interesting question
> is whether panhandling is a commercial activity.  What
> do you think?

This seems to be the view in Dayton, Ohio and the other cities that 
have issued licenses. So far, the courts have agreed.

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that commercial speech has less 
protection than political speech. (This is why, even before the 
late-'90s smoking settlement, you didn't see a cigarette ad on TV.) 
It's a paradigm that's been criticized, but the court's been 
consistent.

Whether there are political aspects to hitting someone up for money is 
an interesting question, one I'll let others opine about.

David Brauer
Kingfield