老澳门开奖结果

On August 17, 2021, the 老澳门开奖结果 and Cockey, Brennan & Maloney, P.C. filed a lawsuit on behalf of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) against the Tri-County Council for the Lower Eastern Shore of Maryland and its public transit division, Shore Transit.

The case is a First and Fourteenth Amendment challenge to Shore Transit鈥檚 policy prohibiting advertisements that are 鈥減olitical,鈥� 鈥渃ontroversial,鈥� 鈥渙bjectionable,鈥� or 鈥渋n poor taste.鈥�

In May 2020, PETA submitted two proposed advertisements calling for the closure of slaughterhouses along Maryland鈥檚 Eastern Shore. Shore Transit rejected the advertisements, stating that they were 鈥渢oo offensive鈥� for the transit system鈥檚 advertising market and 鈥減olitical in nature,鈥� in violation of Shore Transit鈥檚 advertising policy.

The complaint alleges that Shore Transit鈥檚 policy violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it is incapable of reasoned application by Shore Transit鈥檚 officials, viewpoint discriminatory against speech that Shore Transit deems offensive, and inherently vague. It also alleges that Shore Transit applied the policy in a viewpoint discriminatory manner to censor PETA鈥檚 advertisements because of their message. The lawsuit seeks a court order invalidating Shore Transit鈥檚 unconstitutional policy and requiring the agency to accept and run PETA鈥檚 ads on Shore Transit鈥檚 system.

On January 17, 2021, the district court issued an order denying Defendants鈥� motion to dismiss the case. According to the court, the complaint plausibly alleges that 鈥渢he criteria contained in Defendants鈥� policy are insufficient to ensure principled, consistent application鈥�; that the policy鈥檚 prohibition against advertisements are 鈥渃ontroversial, offensive, objectionable, or in poor taste鈥� discriminates against viewpoints that Shore Transit deems offensive; 鈥渢hat PETA鈥檚 advertisements were indeed rejected for viewpoint discriminatory reasons鈥�; and that 鈥淒efendants鈥� prohibitions are vague.鈥�