Seller of pest-control services through door-to-door solicitation filed action alleging that town’s ordinance imposing 7:00 p.m. curfew on commercial door-to-door solicitation violated its First Amendment rights and sought injunction against the curfew’s enforcement.
Following a bench trial, the United States District Court permanently enjoined town from enforcing the curfew. Seller appealed.
The Court of Appeals held that:
- Seller established injury-in-fact required for Article III standing;
- Causal link existed between ordinance and injury-in-fact, as required for Article III standing;
- Seller established redressability requirement of Article III standing;
- Ordinance regulated commercial speech protected by the First Amendment;
- Town failed to demonstrate that ordinance directly advanced its interest in public safety, and thus that interest did not justify burden on First Amendment rights; and
- Town failed to demonstrate that ordinance directly advanced its interest in protecting privacy of its citizens, and thus that interest did not justify burden on First Amendment rights.