A federal judge ruled that the city of Seattle needs to stop enforcing its property crime ordinance as it relates to graffiti. U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman ruled that the city cannot enforce its anti-graffiti because, as it’s currently written, it “poses a real threat to censorship.” Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison is looking to appeal that ruling.
Seattle’s ordinance said that graffiti is a gross misdemeanor, but the judge disagreed, saying the law is too vague, over-broad, and violates constitutional rights. Pechman’s mid-June ruling came in connection with a lawsuit filed by four people who used charcoal and chalk to write messages protesting police violence in early 2021 — on a temporary concrete wall outside the Seattle Police Department’s (SPD) East Precinct.
Attorney Davison is working to overturn the ruling. It’s presentation is based on the grounds that the Seattle graffiti ordinance is constitutionally valid. “The injunction restricts the City from appropriately addressing the growing problem of graffiti,” Davison said in a prepared statement. “The victims of graffiti – the public as a whole, business owners, property owners, and others – must have a voice. Graffiti is a crime that has an enormously negative and costly impact.”
At first, there was confusion on what laws were unenforceable under the order since the city ordinance covers multiple types of property crimes. This included smashing windows or destroying personal property. SPD released a statement that the department “cannot take action on damage to property under this law.”
There was a clarification by the judge who later stated that the injunction is only related to the city’s laws around graffiti and that police are able to make arrests for other types of property crimes; the city attorney’s office announced they would “immediately resume charging cases of property destruction.”
