You can be proud, disdainful, haughty, arrogant and overbearing—all synonyms for insolent—at city council meetings in Costa Mesa, but you can’t be profane or slanderous.

That’s the ruling from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which, on a 2-1 vote, struck down a portion of Costa Mesa’s municipal code that prohibits “insolent” behavior by attendees at city council meetings. The court found that prohibition overly broad, but let stand other prohibitions of behavior. The dissenting judge would have struck down the entire ordinance.

The lawsuit was generated by a confrontation between the city council and Benito Acosta, a U.S. citizen of Mexican heritage who resided in Costa Mesa. In December 2005, the council discussed entering into an agreement with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that would empower city police officers to enforce immigration laws.

The issue of local police cooperating with federal authorities as they hunt for illegal immigrants has been hotly contested across the county. Acosta expressed his opposition to the ordinance, arguing that it would undermine public safety by detering undocumented workers from reporting crimes against them for fear of deportation.

He also called the mayor a “racist pig” . . . twice, and then capped the outburst by calling him a “fucking racist pig.”  The ordinance passed 3-2.

The council reconsidered the ordinance in January 2006 after receiving national attention for its earlier vote. With protesters gathered outside city hall, Acosta addressed the council again and this time asked supporters in the audience to stand as he spoke. The mayor told the audience members to remain seated, but Acosta implored them to stand three more times.

At that point, the mayor called for a recess and police officers attempted to escort Acosta  from the chambers against his will. A tussle ensued and Acosta ended up in handcuffs.

Acosta filed a lawsuit but a U.S. District Court jury rejected his claims that his First and Fourth Amendment free speech and due process rights had been abridged, implicitly finding that his conduct was disruptive.

He appealed and the Ninth Circuit Court said it was OK for him to be insolent, but rejected all his other claims.   

–Ken Broder

To Learn More:

“Insolent” Behavior not Enough to Get You Tossed, Court Says (by Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times)

Benito Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa et al. (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) (pdf)