Ordinance Making Non-Disruptive "Insolent" Speech to City Council a Crime Deemed Facially Unconstitutional

In Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa,published May 3, 2013, the Ninth Circuit ruled that a city ordinance making "insolent" speech at city council meetings a misdemeanor was facially unconstitutional.  Although ordinances barring disruptive speech are permissible, the appellate court analyzed the ordinance and determined that it made "insolent" speech punishable even if not disruptive.  Nevertheless, the court affirmed the rest of the judgment in favor of the defendants.  The defendants were entitled to immunity under state and federal law for enforcing an ordinance they reasonably believed to be valid; and the amount of force used to arrest the plaintiff was appropriate in light of his resistance to being arrested.