Presume the following facts and then address the two questio…
Presume the following facts and then address the two questions below. Also presume Cityville is a small city in Indiana. Cityville recently built a new City Park with a stage made available for public use (i.e., it is a traditional public forum). Under City policies, the stage must be reserved 24 hours in advance, and no sound amplification devices may be used before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. due to nighttime disturbances for nearby residences. During permitted hours, amplification devices are allowed below 120 decibels. The City stage has been reserved and utilized by all sorts of groups. The new City Park is adjacent to the Cityville Convention Center. On September 26, 2025, an LGBTQ+ event was taking place at the Convention Center. The Cityville city government helped promote the event, as Cityville wanted to show that it is a welcoming place for everyone. Paula, who lives in Cityville, believes that marriage rights should be limited to the union of one woman and one man. On September 25, 2025—twenty-four hours in advance—Paula reserved the City Park stage for 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. on September 26, 2025. On September 26, 2025 at 1:30 p.m., as people were arriving for the LGBTQ+ event, Paula took the City Park stage. She used sound amplification (below 120 decibels) to read passages from the recent Petition for Writ of Certiorari that Kim Davis filed with the United States Supreme Court, asking the Court to overturn its ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. In the Petition, Davis alleged that Obergefell threatens religious liberty and “should be overturned because the Constitution makes no reference to same-sex marriage and no such right is implicitly recognized by any constitutional provision.” Pet. for Writ, No. 25-125. Paula read these specifiic passages aloud using her amplification device (below 120 decibels). Because of the amplification, Paula’s readings were clearly audible to people entering the LGBTQ+ event. Some attendees were upset and crying, concerned that the Supreme Court could grant the Petition and potentially overrule Obergefell. Presume, however, that Paula’s speech did not contain any fighting words. Cityville Police Officer Angela was on duty and patrolling the City Park and the Convention Center that day. At 2:00 p.m., Officer Angela—who had observed attendees crying due to Paula’s messages—told Paula she could continue using the stage and deliver her message, but she was not permitted to use any sound amplification devices because of the messages she was conveying. Paula asserted that the City, through Officer Angela, was infringing her free-speech rights, because without amplification her readings could not be heard by people entering the event at the Convention Center. Officer Angela responded that Paula’s speech was hurtful to others and that the City had the right to limit her speech to an appropriate volume to avoid unnecessarily upsetting attendees at the LGBTQ+ event. Angela also asserted that the City was providing ample alternative channels because Paula could still speak on the stage—just not with amplification. Subpart 1 (3 points) Analyze and reach a conclusion as to whether Officer Angela’s actions violated Paula’s First Amendment right to free speech. In your response, explain the full free-speech analysis (including whether any categories of unprotected speech are at issue; the type of restriction; the applicable level of scrutiny; the governing test; and how that test applies to these facts). Reach a clear conclusion as to whether Angela’s actions violated Paula’s free-speech rights. For Subpart 1, presume Paula is a private citizen, not a City employee. Subpart 2 (2.75 points) Presume the same facts as above, but for this subpart also presume that Paula is an administrative assistant for the Cityville Fire Department. Paula’s boss, the Fire Chief, is aware of her views, but they never discuss such matters at work. Paula rarely interacts with anyone at the Fire Department other than the Fire Chief. The City is concerned, however, that because Paula works for the Fire Department, her messages could carry additional weight with event attendees if they learn of her employment; could undermine the message of the event if the attendees learn of her employment;and could cause issues with the orderly administration of the Fire Department. Analyze and advise whether the City has the right to restrict Paula’s speech in light of her status as a Cityville employee. Do not just reach a conclusion; walk through the legal analysis that a court would use in making this determination. Note: While the above facts were created for this exam, Kim Davis did, in August, file a petition seeking, in part, such relief and including the quotation referenced above.