On Monday morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinion in Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los Angeles. (Briefs here; oral argument video here.)
The case involves the constitutionality of a statute — Penal Code section 148.6 — requiring written complaints of police misconduct to be accompanied by signed acknowledgements that filing a knowingly false complaint can lead to a misdemeanor prosecution. Uncommonly, there’s a split on the issue between a 2002 California Supreme Court opinion (statute is constitutional) and a 2005 Ninth Circuit decision (statute is not constitutional).
The court initially limited the issues in the case to: “(1) Does Penal Code section 148.6, subdivision (a), particularly subdivision (a)(2), constitute improper viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment? (2) Does Penal Code section 148.6, subdivision (a), particularly subdivision (a)(2), impose an impermissible burden on the ability to file, or on the City to accept, police misconduct complaints? (3) Is it error to compel the City to comply with a statute that has been ruled unconstitutional by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit?” The court later asked for supplemental briefing on the impact, if any, of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, an issue the court addressed yesterday in its Taking Offense v. State of California opinion upholding an LGBT rights statute.
More about the Police Protective League case here, here, and here.
The case was argued over five months ago, on the late-May calendar, but the supplemental briefing order, coming after the oral argument, restarted the 90-day clock for issuing the opinion.
The opinion can be viewed Monday starting at 10:00 a.m.
