Skip to content

City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
20-1029 5th Cir. Nov 10, 2021 Apr 21, 2022 6-3 Sotomayor OT 2021

Holding: The distinction between on-premises signs and off-premises signs in the city of Austin"s sign code is facially content-neutral under the First Amendment.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on April 21, 2022. Justice Breyer filed a concurring opinion. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Gorsuch and Barrett joined.

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
01/20/2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 1, 2021)
02/08/2021Brief amici curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association, et al. filed.
02/25/2021Waiver of right of respondent Reagan National Advertising of Austin, Inc. to respond filed.
03/01/2021Brief amici curiae of Chambers of Commerce, et al. filed. (Distributed)
03/03/2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.
03/12/2021Response Requested. (Due April 12, 2021)
03/17/2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 12, 2021 to May 12, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
03/23/2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 12, 2021.
05/12/2021Brief of respondents Reagan National Advertising of Austin, Incorporated, et al. in opposition filed.
05/26/2021Reply of City of Austin not accepted for filing. (May 28, 2021) (Corrected version submitted)
05/26/2021Reply of petitioner City of Austin filed.
06/01/2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/17/2021.
06/21/2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
06/28/2021Petition GRANTED.
08/03/2021Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Reagan National Advertising of Austin, Inc.
08/03/2021Motion for an extension of time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits filed.
08/04/2021Letter requesting case caption correction filed by petitioner.
08/09/2021Motion to extend the time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is granted and the time is extended to and including August 13, 2021.
08/13/2021Brief of petitioner City of Austin filed.
08/13/2021Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
08/16/2021ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, November 10, 2021.
08/17/2021Motion for an extension of time to file respondents' brief on the merits filed.
08/19/2021Brief amicus curiae of The American Planning Association in Support of Neither Party filed.
08/20/2021Amicus brief of Chambers of Commerce, Business Leagues, Environmental Organizations, and On-Premise Sign Associations not accepted for filing. (August 20, 2021)
08/20/2021Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.
08/20/2021Brief amici curiae of Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and Professor Genevieve Lakier filed.
08/20/2021Brief amici curiae of The National League of Cities; The U.S. Conference of Mayors; The International City/County Management Association; The International Municipal Lawyers Association filed.
08/20/2021Brief amicus curiae of International Sign Association filed.
08/20/2021Brief amici curiae of Land Developers, Chambers of Commerce, and Scenic Organizations filed.
08/20/2021Brief amicus curiae of Outfront Media Inc. filed.
08/20/2021Brief amici curiae of State of Florida, et al., filed.
08/20/2021Amicus brief of State of Florida, et al., not accepted for filing. (October 08, 2021--Duplicate submission)
08/26/2021Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.
08/31/2021Motion to extend the time to file respondents brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including September 22, 2021.
09/01/2021Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.
09/01/2021The record from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.
09/21/2021CIRCULATED
09/22/2021Letter pursuant to Rule 35.3 received.
09/22/2021Brief of respondents Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
09/27/2021Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Prosperity Foundation filed. (Distributed)
09/28/2021Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amici curiae of Alliance Defending Freedom, et al. filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amici curiae of Out of Home Advertising Association of America, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Free Speech filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Protect the First Foundation filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Summus 2, LLC dba Summus Outdoor filed. (Distributed)
09/29/2021Brief amicus curiae of Liberty Justice Center filed. (Distributed)
10/04/2021Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.
10/18/2021The time for oral argument is allotted as follows: 20 minutes for petitioner, 15 minutes for the Acting Solicitor General, and 35 minutes for respondents.
10/22/2021Reply of petitioner City of Austin filed. (Distributed)
11/10/2021Argued. For petitioner: Michael R. Dreeben, Washington, D. C.; and Benjamin Snyder, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D. C.
04/21/2022Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Breyer, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a concurring opinion. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch and Barrett, JJ., joined.
05/23/2022Judgment Issued