'Fighting words' may not apply to crowds

Fighting words, the Salt Lake City Council found out this week, don't apply to the masses.

Instead, the so-called fighting words doctrine, established by the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts, applies only to individuals, or, at most, small groups of no more than four, city attorneys told the council this week.

So, while some Salt Lake City leaders would like to restrain anti-LDS street preaching during The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' annual general conference next month, they likely won't be able to because preachers generally address large crowds.

For example, if a street preacher made a general statement saying "LDS women are harlots" as one reportedly did to a crowd of people walking by, that would be OK under federal courts' interpretation of the First Amendment. However, if a street preacher singled out a single woman and called her a harlot, that wouldn't be considered free speech and would violate the city's laws banning words that are "inherently likely to cause a violent reaction."

"It is not enough that the words are very insulting or highly offensive or arouse some people to anger," the city's free speech guidelines note. "Also, words are not fighting words if they are spoken to a crowd. Listeners are expected to turn their heads and ignore such speech."

While city attorneys — at Mayor Rocky Anderson's request — recommended this week that the city expand its definitions of fighting "words" to include actions, gestures and displays also, those same attorneys said that expansion would have no effect on crowd speech.

If free speech changes have little or no effect on street preachers at conference, some council members wondered why the city is expanding its ordinances at all.

"What does this prohibit that now is not prohibited?" councilman Dave Buhler asked. "To me it really changes nothing."

City Attorney Ed Rutan conceded the ordinance change was minor in application.

Anderson had asked the city attorneys office to examine the city's free speech laws after two skirmishes between street preachers and conference attendees last October. During the review, the LDS Church had submitted public comment suggesting buffer zones between preachers and conferencegoers.

Dale Lambert, the only attorney on the council, said this week he disagreed with City Attorney Ed Rutan and Deputy Attorney Boyd Ferguson's interpretation of case law. Lambert said fighting words could apply to groups.

For example, someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theater wouldn't be protected speech, and it is aimed at a group. If that "group" speech isn't protected, Lambert said he wondered why fighting words aimed a group should be protected.

"In the whole area of First Amendment and free speech and religious speech laws there are so many cases to get clear and bright line tests, that's pretty difficult to do," he said.

But Ferguson and Rutan insist there is clearly defined case law stating that fighting words cannot be directed at groups and conceded the ordinance change was minor in application.

"We did view it more as a clarification than any major change," he said.

---

E-mail: bsnyder@desnews.com