Advertisement

Editorial:

Two months ago, the city of Costa Mesa successfully dispatched a free-speech lawsuit brought against it by activist Benito Acosta. Now, the city faces a free speech federal suit — without his name on it — that’s taking aim at Costa Mesa’s controversial solicitation ordinance.

The plaintiffs in the case are the Assn. of Day Laborers of Costa Mesa and the Tonantzin Collective, a group representing immigrants workers and their families in Orange County. The attorneys in the case — which include lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund — deny the suit is focused only on day laborers. The law, they claim, could just as easily put the kibosh on folks twirling arrows to open houses or cheap sandwiches, or subject high schoolers to arrest for hawking car washes for new volleyball uniforms.

The text of the 2005 law seems simple: It shall be unlawful for any person to stand on a street and actively solicit employment, business or contributions from any person in a motor vehicle traveling along a street.”

Advertisement

In other words, as City Atty. Kimberly Hall Barlow said, it’s all right to stand on the roadside and hold up a sign, as long as you’re standing still and not gesticulating in a manner that could take drivers’ eyes off the road. Try telling that to a bunch of exuberant teenagers rearing to get drivers to pony up cash for a car wash.

Barlow declined to comment on how the city would respond to the new lawsuit, or whether Costa Mesa would change its solicitation law to shield itself from free speech lawsuits. But she did say this: The ordinance is all about preventing road accidents.

“It’s not intended to focus on day laborers. ... We’re not trying to address free speech,” she said. “We’re trying to address conduct. We’re trying to keep drivers from being distracted.”

We would like to believe that this law on its face in no way encroaches on free speech and that it has nothing to do with day laborers, but we can’t help being somewhat skeptical. While we sympathize with the complaints of many locals that Costa Mesa’s large number of undocumented immigrants — many of whom are day laborers — pose a problem that needs to be managed and regulated, we hope that the city isn’t using the ordinance as a cover for dealing with the issue.

Besides, can Costa Mesa really afford another protracted battle in federal court? Remember, the bill for prosecuting Acosta and fending off his suit has grown, at last check, to nearly $600,000.


Advertisement