Court Orders San Francisco to Pay Legal Fees in Begging Case


For Immediate Release: July 11, 1997

SAN FRANCISCO -- In the final installment of an eight-year legal battle that resulted in a landmark decision that the First Amendment protects the right of poor people to request funds, US District Judge William Orrick has ordered the City to pay $323,785.56 in fees and costs in Blair v. Shanahan.

"This fee award underscores the significance of Judge Orrick's important 1992 decision that peaceful begging is protected expression," said Thomas McInerney, of Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges, a cooperating attorney for the ACLU who handled the case on a pro bono basis. Michael Hallerud of Thelen, Marrin and Margaret Crosby of the ACLU of Northern California also represent the plaintiff in the case.

"This decision should put cities on notice that violating the rights of the poor is not only wrong, but carries a price," McInerney added.

The case was originally filed in 1989 on behalf of Celestus Blair who was arrested five times for peacefully asking people for money in downtown San Francisco. He was charged with violating California Penal Code Section 647 (c), which makes it a misdemeanor to approach others on public sidewalks "for the purpose of begging or soliciting alms."

In 1991, Judge Orrick declared the state law prohibition against begging unconstitutional and the appellate court rejected the city's appeal. On remand, Judge Orrick granted a motion to vacate his opinion on procedural grounds. However, that ruling did not eliminate the opinion as an influential precedent.

In the final stage of the lawsuit, the City argued primarily that Blair had achieved only modest success and should not receive substantial compensation for attorneys' fees. Judge Orrick rejected that contention.

The court concluded that the civil rights suit had accomplished its purpose of protecting the constitutional right to beg. The 1991 Blair opinion ruled that begging informs the community about "the way our society treats its poor and disenfranchised" and can change "the way the listener sees his or her relationship with and obligations to the poor."

The decision also ruled that the government could not constitutionally distinguish between the fundraising appeals of organized charities and of destitute individuals on the public street. Courts throughout the country invalidating laws prohibiting begging have cited Judge Orrick's Blair decision.

In addition, Judge Orrick wrote in the June 16, 1997 decision, the 1991 Blair opinion halted San Francisco's enforcement of the state law and prompted the City to enact a new ordinance regulating begging "more consistent with the First Amendment." Finally, the court ruled that Blair's success in securing a damage award for his arrests (approximately $4,800) and expungement of his arrest record was not trivial.

Last month, the City of Berkeley agreed to pay the ACLU $110,000 as part of settlement in a case challenging its law restricting the right to request funds. The City substantially modified the law following a district court opinion striking down major portions of the ordinance. (Berkeley Community Health Project v. City of Berkeley.)

"Judge Orrick's 1991 decision emphasizes the importance of the rights of free expression which were denied to Blair, and as a result of the order, these rights are now protected for all persons in California.

It is ironic that this City, whose namesake is St. Francis, would deprive the poor of their right to seek alms," McInerney said.