Current Events > Landlord tells tenants not to display Pride Month.

(+) Yeah! (+)

DnDer posted...

I'd assume to the same standard we're expected to protect the speech of others? Mostly, in ensure we (or others) make sure speech is protected up to the point of causing harm.

"Define harm."

I have no idea what that looks like legally. But there has to be some kind of legal standard for "where someone's nose begins" even when it comes to harm of a non-physical kind, like the kind a business (or, ugh, a landlord) could suffer.

Constitutionally, the only entity required to protect speech is the government, else moderation would be unconstitutional.

pnut027 posted...

Which would be covered under the contract if it states that no sign should be posted with the owners permission. And hes not giving permission. It doesnt matter what the sign represents.

The owner is shit, but it would be a lawful contract.

andel posted...

the contract specifies any signage must be approved by the landlord. his reasoning for this is dumb but it isn't a bad clause to have because it could allow a property owner to prevent a tenant from displaying a nazi/confederate/trump flag.

The poster I was responding to said he'd want discretion (as a hypothetical landlord) - so he could allow a tenant to fly a Nazi flag but not a Pride flag - which seems to violate "no sign at all" clause. I only glanced at the first page of Google results, whether that is legal or not seems to depend on state (and the year).