Los Angeles City Council Faces Free Speech Controversy

The Los Angeles City Council is entering a contentious battle over free speech, stirred by an initiative that restricts what people can say during public meetings.

Two significant free speech organizations have threatened legal action against the city, challenging a new rule that bans the use of certain offensive slurs during City Council speeches.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the First Amendment Coalition have given city officials 30 days to commit to repealing City Council Rule 7 and halt its enforcement. They claim this measure infringes on constitutional rights, as it involves banning specific words in public discourse.

City leaders risk backlash from a lawsuit that could stem from their actions. The groups argue that prohibiting even aggressive language crosses a fundamental line, igniting a major legal confrontation regarding the authority of elected officials over speech in public settings.

If the council doesn’t comply, the organizations are prepared to represent a local resident, Stacey Segarra Bollinger, who has faced penalties under the new policy.

“The Constitution prohibits the government from banning words,” FIRE emphasized in a recent statement. They contend that, regardless of how offensive, all words are protected under the First Amendment.

This rule, passed with a 14-0 vote on July 30, 2025, prohibits the public from using specific slurs during comments before the City Council or its committees. The restriction extends to plural forms and variations created by adding suffixes like “-ish,” “-y,” “-ly,” or “-ing.” Those who break the rules will be removed from the meeting and barred from future council meetings.

According to FIRE, repeat offenders could be banned for as long as six business days.

City Council President Marquise Harris Dawson introduced this initiative in March 2025, justifying it by citing concerns that such language had sparked tensions, almost leading to violent confrontations, and had deterred constituents from participating in civic matters.

Some supporters referenced a 1942 Supreme Court decision that recognized a narrow exception for “contesting words” under First Amendment protections. However, FIRE and the First Amendment Coalition argue that Los Angeles is overstepping these boundaries by penalizing individuals for merely voicing banned terms, even when critiquing the council’s own censorship efforts.

Their legal challenge emphasizes Bollinger, who often speaks during public comment periods. In a letter to City Council leaders, Bollinger criticized the city’s speech limitations, suggesting that the council was “afraid of the word ‘ct.’”

He challenged the council by stating that name-calling was deemed more outrageous than instances of police brutality against citizens and journalists. Advocacy groups insist Bollinger’s comments were relevant, concise, and did not disrupt the meeting. Nonetheless, Council member Heather Hutt objected to his language, requesting that the presiding council president enforce the rules.

The presiding president warned Bollinger that another usage of the banned term would lead to his removal; this threat came to fruition on December 3, 2025. When Bollinger repeated the term while criticizing the council’s policy, he was expelled and prohibited from attending additional meetings that day.

FIRE’s legal director and a staff attorney argued in their letter that the council’s rule violates both the First Amendment and California’s Brown Act, claiming it imposes unreasonable restrictions and allows for the exclusion of speakers without legitimate disruption of the meeting.

The groups have called on the city to repeal the ban and its enforcement guidelines to avoid legal disputes. They expressed hope that the council would seize this chance to align its regulations with constitutional standards before a lawsuit becomes necessary.

Harris-Dawson hinted that the current ban might be just a precursor to further measures, saying, “We believe this is the maximum step we can take at this time, but we believe it will pave the way for additional steps in the future.” He also noted an intention to pursue judicial review.

The Los Angeles City Council comprises 15 members, including 10 Democrats, 4 Democratic Socialists, 1 Independent, and no Republicans.