Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Utah Court of Appeals hears argument over when persistent protest becomes stalking
Summary
In oral argument on Ragsdale v. Fishler (No. 20230023) the appeals court wrestled with whether repeated, offensive protest conduct can constitute "stalking" under Utah law without violating the First Amendment, focusing on the adequacy of district‑court findings, the Baird factors, and whether injunction language unlawfully burdens speech such as yard signs.
The Utah Court of Appeals heard argument in Ragsdale v. Fishler (No. 20230023) over whether repeated, offensive protests directed at a neighboring business can legally qualify as stalking and, if so, whether a resulting injunction unconstitutionally restricts First Amendment speech.
Kurt Ignatison, counsel for appellant George Fishler, told the three‑judge panel that the case "is about whether a nonviolent protest of the business next door turns into stalking if your protest is sufficiently offensive...and you persist in the same protest for an extended period of time." Ignatison urged the court to distinguish moral judgment from the legal test and to scrutinize whether the district court tied its findings to the objective Baird factors…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
