COURT UPHOLDS PARK RALLY PERMITS

WASHINGTON - A city system to decide which groups or events may use scarce
parkland is not an unconstitutional curb on free speech, a unanimous
Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

Chicago's procedures for granting or denying permits have nothing to do
with regulating the content of speech in city parks, and everything to do
with efficiency and public safety, the court said in an opinion written by
Justice Antonin Scalia.

The ruling underscores localities' power to regulate use of their own
resources, so long as the rules are "content neutral."

"The Park District's ordinance does not authorize a licensor to pass
judgment on the content of speech," Scalia wrote. "None of the grounds for
denying a permit has anything to do with what a speaker might say."

The court upheld lower court rulings against a group whose 1997 application
was rejected. The Windy City Hemp Development Board wanted to hold a rally
in support of legalized marijuana.

The hemp group argued that the city's permit decisions can be capricious,
and that the system gives too much power to administrators to pick and
choose which events to allow.

"We think not," Scalia wrote.

Chicago requires permits for park events with more than 50 people and
receives thousands of requests a year.

Administrators may reject a permit for one or more reasons, including if
the park is already booked, the requested activity is dangerous, or if the
application is incomplete or untruthful.

"On balance, we think the permissive nature of the ordinance furthers,
rather than constricts, free speech," Scalia wrote.

The Bush administration supported the park system in the case, Thomas v.
Chicago Park District, 00-1249.