Few changes to free-speech laws

With one month until The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' annual general conference, Salt Lake City Attorney Ed Rutan's office has finished a four-month examination of the city's free-speech ordinances.

But that lengthy review has brought few recommended changes to city code. In fact, Rutan is recommending that the City Council only alter a few lines of the city's existing ordinances governing free speech.

That modification falls short of what the LDS Church wanted. Back in December the church had suggested more sweeping ordinance changes, including "buffer" zones between street preachers and conference attendees.

Rutan will offer his recommendations to the City Council Tuesday, suggesting that the council alter one city ordinance to outlaw "acts, gestures and displays" that incite violence or "are inherently likely to cause a violent reaction" or "create a clear and present danger of a breach of the peace or imminent threat of violence."

Presently, the city's disturbing-the-peace ordinance only bans "words" that were actually "intended to cause acts of violence."

Salt Lake City Rocky Anderson had Rutan examine the city's ordinances governing free speech after clashes arose between Christian street preachers, who are critical of the LDS Church, and attendees of the October semi-annual general conference. Those skirmishes erupted after street preachers donned religious clothing considered sacred by LDS members. Seeing the preachers wear the garments around their necks was too much for two men, who assaulted the preachers and stole the clothing.

Given that history, the "acts, gestures and displays" addition may be significant since some might consider wearing the sacred clothing as an act that is "inherently likely to cause a violent reaction."

But Anderson doesn't think so, and he reiterated Friday that the wearing of the sacred clothing is probably akin to flag burning, which federal courts have ruled to be free speech.

"If burning a flag as symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment then an analogy could be drawn to the display of garments," he said.

Last month, Anderson and Rutan released more informal "free-speech guidelines" that were designed to educate street preachers and others about what is and what is not constitutionally protected speech. Those guidelines were met with indignation from the street preachers, who said city leaders couldn't prohibit any of their speech since it is religious in nature.