You see, the
What the hell?! That’s how I spend most of my professional and free time!
They do try to qualify their anti-speech statute by permitting such speech if, in their minds, it is for a “legitimate purpose.” But fortunately for me—and for every American who values the write (and right) to free speech—their ridiculous law is probably unconstitutional. Because my Con Law prof essentially skipped the first amendment, I’ll defer to Popehat:
I think your ordinance is clearly, obviously, patently, inarguably unconstitutional, because it prohibits a wide variety of speech protected by the First Amendment, all based on the vague, lonely clause "which serves no legitimate purpose." That clause is apparently one that you people in
Wisconsin think is some sort
of magic "go away First Amendment!" mantra. But it's not. Used
as you've used it, it leaves people to guess at what conduct is legal or
illegal, thus violating due process as well as freedom of expression. Courts
have upheld the "no legitimate purpose" clause only when it is
attached to statutes that are far more specific about the conduct prohibited,
and where the conduct prohibited is already outside the protection of the First
But what does Poephat think of our government agents of Vernon County?
[M]y purpose is to question whether officious officials like you serve any legitimate purpose whatsoever in society, or whether you simply waste taxpayer money and generate high-grade nuisance. Moreover, by measures like this, you continue to advance the transformation of our society into a collection of whiners and misfits who run to an incompetent government over every slight, no matter how ridiculous.
I like the way the Popehat operates.