Fresno Metronews

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Metronews was an alternative weekly newspaper published from 1983 to 1998 in Fresno, California which was noted for its libertarian politics and strong criticism of city government, entertainment and arts coverage, and their provocative "It's A Crime" coverage of unusual police reports which often revealed embarrassing circumstances of those who were the subjects of the reports.

Published by Press Communications Inc. and edited by Marc Jackson, the 50,000 circulation periodical also contained rare interviews from numerous politicians as well as personalities as diverse as economist Milton Friedman, singer Peggy Lee, prostitute Stephanie Smith (who was charged with attempted murder because she was HIV positive), and others.

Due to the controversy often generated by the newspaper, several individuals attempted to stop the distribution of Metronews, and persuaded the City of Fresno to sue the newspaper publisher and editor under an ordinance which restricted the door-to-door distribution of newspapers and advertisements when the occupant of a residence posted a small "Do Not Deliver" sign.

Although independent carriers delivered Metronews and the newspaper had implemented procedures attempting to prevent delivery to addresses of people who had notified Metronews that they do not wish to receive the paper, the City of Fresno filed a complaint against Jackson and Press Communications to enjoin them from causing distribution of unauthorized newspapers to posted residences and from violating Fresno Municipal Code section 8-808. The City alleged Metronews repeatedly had caused unauthorized newspapers to be distributed in violation of the ordinance and threatened to continue such distribution. Metronews cross-complained alleging the ordinance was unconstitutional both on its face and as applied to the newspaper in this particular case, and sought to enjoin its enforcement. Metronews filed a motion for summary judgment on both the complaint and cross-complaint. Metronews submitted evidence regarding the procedures it used to avoid any violation of the ordinance. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Metronews on the city's complaint when the city failed to present any evidence to support its claim that Metronews violated the ordinance. The court denied summary judgment on the cross-complaint, finding that although the ordinance was facially valid, there were triable issues of material fact regarding its constitutionality as applied to Metronews. Copies of Metronews were not introduced into evidence and the court concluded it could not decide the issue as a matter of law because it could not determine whether the paper was "commercial speech or political speech."

Following a trial, the court issued its decision in which it adopted the previous ruling that the ordinance was constitutional on its face and found "no evidence that said regulation is unconstitutional as applied to Metronews." The court entered judgment in favor of the city. Metronews appealed.

The appellate court overturned the trial court decision as violating the First Amendment.

In the case, the City of Fresno argued the delivery of religious literature or campaign literature is properly exempt from the ordinance because these categories of speech are entitled to a "higher degree of protection under the Constitution". Metronews strongly disagreed.

In City of Fresno v. Metronews, the Court sided with Metronews stating, "The possibility that speech may be "undesirable" or "unpopular" is not an acceptable basis for the government to curtail speech which is otherwise protected by the First Amendment. (citations) Furthermore, the trial court's reasoning is based upon an unproved assumption that advertisements and unsubscribed newspapers are universally less desirable and less popular than other types of written material (e.g., religious, political or charitable publications) that may be delivered to a home or business without the prior authorization of the occupant. Even assuming this could be shown, it requires a judgment based upon the relative value of the content of speech which is forbidden under the First Amendment. (citations)" The court also awarded Metronews attorneys fees finding that the case "enforces constitutional rights necessarily affects the public interest and confers a significant benefit upon the general public."