Tate David Prows v. City of Oxford, Ohio, et al.

Petitioner’s case represents one of the most clear-cut examples of a First Amendment chill in the history of this country. Ordinance 3579 was an unlawful creation of police power, making Respondents’ actions outside the sphere of legitimate legislative authority. 3579 was unconstitutionally broad, as it targeted and abridged the right of the people to peaceably assemble. Coates v. City of Cincinnati 402 U.S. 611 (1971). The District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, dismissed the Amended Complaint filed by Petitioner for lack of Article III Standing, stating that the chilling effect that Petitioner experienced was a subjective chill. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of the Amended Complaint on the same grounds. Petitioner filed a petition for en banc rehearing with the Sixth Circuit which the Sixth Circuit declined to review. The two questions presented are:

1. Are all First Amendment Chilling Effect Cases Subjective?

2. Do Political Subdivisions of States Have the Lawful Authority to Create Their Own Police Powers?