By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the removal of a rainbow crosswalk, Key West residents painted their fences in similar colors, leading to city fines. The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal lawsuit challenging these penalties on First Amendment grounds, alleging selective enforcement against LGBTQ+ expression. The lawsuit contends that while the city cited a lesbian couple for their rainbow fence, other homes with non-compliant colored features were ignored, suggesting a politically motivated suppression of LGBTQ+ messaging. This legal action highlights concerns about censorship and state overreach in the suppression of free expression.
Read the original article here
A lesbian couple in Key West, Florida, is fighting back with a lawsuit after being fined for painting their fence in rainbow colors. This wasn’t just an aesthetic choice; it was a deliberate act of protest against the city’s decision to remove Pride crosswalks. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has stepped in, arguing that the city selectively enforced its code against the couple, infringing upon their First Amendment rights. The core of the issue lies in Key West’s decision to remove the decorated sidewalks, a move that stemmed from a directive by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who, along with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, claimed the rainbow crosswalks posed public safety risks.
The couple, Coley Sohn and Linda Bagley-Sohn, repainted twelve pickets on their Old Town home in the vibrant colors of the rainbow, a move that inspired a wave of similar protests across the city. However, this creative expression of solidarity quickly drew the attention of city officials. After receiving code complaints, the couple was cited by Key West authorities, with the threat of escalating daily fines if they didn’t revert their fence back to its original white. This situation highlights a peculiar conflict between a city’s aesthetic codes and its residents’ rights to express themselves, particularly when that expression is a response to the removal of symbols of inclusivity.
Sohn, a filmmaker with a Sundance-featured portfolio, and her wife viewed their painted fence as a way to visually declare that their community still embraced inclusion, even after the removal of the Pride crosswalks. Their intention was clear: to stand for the values the rainbow represents. They had even sought a permit from the city to paint their fence pickets in rainbow colors in December, but it wasn’t until February that the city made its determination, stating the display violated the code because the fence was no longer painted in an approved color. This timing and the subsequent fine suggest a deliberate targeting of their message, rather than a neutral enforcement of a long-standing rule.
The lawsuit alleges that while over fifty homeowners in Key West followed the couple’s lead and painted parts of their fences in rainbow colors, only Sohn and Bagley-Sohn were cited. This selective enforcement, according to the ACLU, was triggered by a complaint from a neighbor who has reportedly posted anti-LGBTQ messages on social media. The implication here is that the city’s actions were not based on a genuine concern for code violations across the board, but rather a response to pressure or bias, specifically targeting a lesbian couple who were making a public statement. This pattern of singling out individuals for their expressive actions raises serious questions about fairness and equal application of the law.
The argument for selective enforcement is further bolstered by the context of the removal of the Pride crosswalks. It seems that the city’s decision to crack down on the rainbow fences came in the wake of a broader move to eliminate these visible symbols of LGBTQ+ pride. This suggests that the city’s actions are not merely about maintaining property aesthetics, but about suppressing a particular message. The ACLU’s involvement underscores the seriousness of this alleged infringement on free speech, as they are dedicated to protecting such fundamental rights against governmental overreach.
The situation in Key West raises broader concerns about the extent to which local governments can regulate personal expression on private property, especially when that expression is a form of political or social commentary. The idea that a permit might be needed to paint a fence a different color, particularly in a city like Key West, known for its vibrant and diverse culture, seems incongruous to many. The contrast is often drawn to other forms of decoration or displays, such as extensive Christmas decorations, which are generally more accepted. The legal challenge brought by the couple and the ACLU aims to clarify the boundaries of free speech and to ensure that cities cannot arbitrarily punish individuals for voicing their views through peaceful, creative means. The outcome of this lawsuit will likely have significant implications for how such expressive actions are treated in Florida and potentially beyond, setting a precedent for how cities can and cannot enforce their codes in response to politically charged visual statements.