Herson v. City of Richmond

Issue: (1) Whether, when this Court grants, vacates, and remands (“GVR”s) a case back to a circuit court of the United States “for further consideration in light of” a recently decided opinion of this Court, the Court expects that adding an ipse dixit footnote to the original opinion is sufficient, or whether the circuit court must discuss how the law applies to the facts in light of the recently decided opinion of this Court; and (2) whether, when this Court GVRs a case back to a circuit court of the United States “for further consideration in light of” a recently decided opinion of this Court, the circuit court may deem the substantive issue to have been procedurally forfeited even though the substantive issue was raised below and the same procedural forfeiture arguments were unsuccessfully argued to this Court in opposition to the original petition for certiorari; (3) whether, where a municipal sign ordinance identified various categories of signs based on the type of information they convey, then subjected each category to different restrictions, exempted signs containing favored noncommercial subject-matter (including foreign and domestic governmental insignia, religious symbols, and civic, patriotic, and commemorative speech), and also favored commercial speech over noncommercial speech, abridged the First Amendment in light of this Court’s recent opinion in Reed v. Town of Gilbert.