The U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to overhaul its First Amendment jurisprudence in a case involving street signs in Arizona. For many years, the court has applied the First Amendment's protection—”Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech”—with different levels of rigor depending on the type of speech involved. Political speech has long been regarded as the species of expression most deserving of protection, while governments have been given wider latitude to regulate other types of expression. Critics of this approach, like Justice Clarence Thomas, note the lack of any license in the text of the First Amendment itself for such distinctions. Supporters point to the Framers' intent and the unworkability of subjecting all governmental regulations of expression to strict scrutiny.

In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, No. 13-502, a Phoenix suburb waded into this controversy when it attempted to regulate signs posted by a local church. The town of Gilbert regulates the display of signs to “assure proper and efficient expression through visual communication,” “to eliminate confusing, distracting, and unsafe signs,” and to “enhance the visual environment” of Gilbert. Gilbert's sign ordinance classifies signs using 19 different categories; the three of particular importance in this case are temporary directional signs, political signs and ideological signs. Depending on a sign's classification, Gilbert imposes different restrictions on its size, location and duration of its posting.

Gilbert's sign ordinance was challenged by Good News Community Church and its pastor, Clyde Reed. Good News is a relatively small congregation in Gilbert that meets weekly for fellowship and worship. The church does not own a building of its own. Instead, it has held services in various locations, including local schools and a senior living center. Because of the shifting locations for church meetings, Good News has placed curbside signs in Gilbert providing directions to the meetings and contact information, according to the opinion.