The Los Angeles Metropolis Council is barreling towards a First Modification showdown after making an attempt to police what People can — and may’t — say throughout public conferences.
Town is dealing with the specter of a lawsuit from two of the nation’s main free speech teams over a controversial rule that bars members of the general public from utilizing two offensive slurs whereas addressing the Metropolis Council.
The organizations argue town has crossed a constitutional line by banning particular phrases outright, establishing a high-stakes authorized struggle over whether or not elected officers can resolve which speech is off-limits in a public discussion board.
The Basis for Particular person Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the First Modification Coalition have given metropolis leaders 30 days to repeal Council Rule 7 and make an “unconditional dedication” to cease implementing it.
If not, the teams say they’ll file swimsuit on behalf of Los Angeles resident Stacey Segarra-Bohlinger, who they are saying has already been punished twice underneath the coverage.
“The Structure forbids the federal government from banning phrases,” FIRE mentioned in a press release Thursday, arguing that nonetheless offensive the language could also be, it stays protected by the First Modification.
The rule, authorised unanimously in a 14-0 vote on July 30, 2025, bars members of the general public from utilizing the so-called “N-word,” the “C-word” or “any variation” of both time period throughout public remark earlier than the Metropolis Council or its committees.
The ban goes past the phrases themselves.
It additionally outlaws plural types and variations created by including suffixes equivalent to “-ish,” “-y,” “-ly” and “-ing.”
Anybody who violates the rule will be thrown out of the rest of the assembly and barred from attending another council conferences held later that day.
Repeat offenders will be banned from future conferences for as much as six enterprise days, in line with FIRE.
Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson launched the measure in March 2025, arguing repeated use of the slurs had infected tensions, almost sparked bodily confrontations and discouraged residents from taking part in metropolis enterprise.
Supporters pointed to the Supreme Courtroom’s 1942 choice in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, which carved out the slim “combating phrases” exception to First Modification protections.
However FIRE and the First Modification Coalition argue Los Angeles has gone far past that restricted exception by punishing individuals merely for saying forbidden phrases, even once they’re criticizing town’s personal censorship coverage.
Their authorized problem facilities on Segarra-Bohlinger, a daily speaker throughout public-comment durations.
In keeping with a letter despatched to Harris-Dawson and Metropolis Legal professional Hydee Feldstein Soto, Segarra-Bohlinger criticized the council’s speech restrictions throughout an Oct. 31, 2025, assembly by saying the council was “afraid of the phrase ‘c–t.’”
She then added: “Form of insane the way you’re extra offended by unhealthy phrases than police brutalizing residents and journalists within the streets.”
The advocacy teams say her remarks stayed on subject, remained inside her allotted talking time and didn’t disrupt the assembly or intrude with council enterprise.
Nonetheless, Councilmember Heather Hutt objected to the language and urged Council President Professional Tempore Bob Blumenfield, who was presiding over the assembly, to implement the rule.
Blumenfield warned Segarra-Bohlinger that utilizing the prohibited phrase once more would get her eliminated.
On Dec. 3, 2025, that warning grew to become actuality.
Segarra-Bohlinger once more used the phrase whereas criticizing the coverage, was ejected from the assembly and barred from attending any extra council conferences scheduled that day.
Of their letter, FIRE employees legal professional Zachary Silver and First Modification Coalition authorized director David Loy argue the rule violates each the First Modification and California’s Brown Act as a result of it discriminates based mostly on viewpoint, imposes unreasonable restrictions on public remark and permits officers to take away audio system whose remarks don’t truly disrupt conferences.
The teams are urging town to scrap the phrase ban and its enforcement provisions earlier than the dispute lands in courtroom.
“We hope the council will take this chance to deliver its assembly guidelines into compliance with the First Modification and Brown Act with out want for litigation,” the letter states.
Harris-Dawson has additionally prompt the present ban could solely be the start.
“That is as a lot a step as we will take at this second, we consider. However we predict it is going to open us as much as take extra steps sooner or later,” he mentioned.
In one other occasion, he added, “We’re going to attempt to get in all of the phrases.”
In keeping with FIRE, Harris-Dawson has additionally publicly acknowledged he’s “wanting to get in entrance of a decide.”
The 15-member LA Metropolis Council consists of 10 Democrats, 4 democratic socialists, and 1 Unbiased, with 0 Republicans.
