‘PETA v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’ Case Summary

Case Name: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Index Number: 2:21-cv-07662-SSS-MAAx
Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

In September 2021, PETA filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro)—one of the nation’s largest public transit systems by annual ridership—over its unconstitutional ad policy and its refusal to run the following PETA pro-vegan advertisements in 2019 and 2021:

LA Metro rejected our ads asking riders to practice kindness to animals, while frequently running ads encouraging its patrons to wear or eat them. Our lawsuit argued that the policy—which barred ads for noncommercial speech unless they were approved by a government agency—amounted to a prior restraint on speech and viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, particularly since LA Metro had allowed other noncommercial ads.

Specifically, LA Metro rejected both advertisements under its prohibition on noncommercial advertising. The prohibition limited advertising on LA Metro buses to ads that “promote for sale, lease or other form of financial benefit a product, service, event or other property interest in primarily a commercial manner for primarily a commercial purpose.” LA Metro provided an exception for noncommercial advertising by government actors and for “non-profit organizations that partner with a Governmental Agency and submit advertising that advances the joint purpose of the non-profit organization and the Governmental Agency, as determined by each of them.” Among LA Metro’s arguments was that PETA’s failure to obtain a government sponsor for its advertisements was purportedly the sole basis on which our proposed ads had been denied.

PETA Prevails on Summary Judgment

In September 2022, both parties moved for summary judgment. On December 19, 2022, the court granted summary judgment in favor of PETA, holding that the ad policy’s noncommercial advertising prohibition was not sufficiently definite and objective to prevent arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement. The court also found that LA Metro’s exception to the prohibition that allowed noncommercial ads endorsed by the government was unreasonable.

Holding that PETA had successfully established that LA Metro’s noncommercial prohibition violated the First Amendment on its face, on January 4, 2023, the court permanently enjoined LA Metro from enforcing its noncommercial advertising prohibition and exception for government-sponsored advertisements. Following our victory, LA Metro appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. PETA also cross-appealed the district court’s decision that it was facially viewpoint-neutral for LA Metro to allow commercial advertising but prohibit noncommercial advertising.

Judge Sides With PETA After LA Metro Attempts to Dissolve the Permanent Injunction

In response to our success in the lawsuit, LA Metro substantially revised its ad policy to remove the unconstitutional exception for government-endorsed noncommercial ads and provide standards for determining whether an advertisement is commercial or noncommercial. Following the revision of its policy—and while its appeal was pending before the Ninth Circuit—LA Metro moved in the district court to vacate the injunction. After extensive briefing on the issue, the district court denied LA Metro’s motion, upholding the permanent injunction prohibiting LA Metro from enforcing its previous unconstitutional ad policy and “declin[ing] to give Metro’s new noncommercial advertisement ban the stamp of constitutional approval.” After the district court dealt LA Metro its second loss, both parties voluntarily dismissed their appeals in the Ninth Circuit.

LA Metro Ordered to Pay PETA More Than $250,000

On June 13, 2024, the district court awarded PETA more than 97% of its requested attorneys’ fees and costs—totaling $250,815, plus interest. As the district court found, “in receiving a final judgment and a permanent injunction against [LA] Metro, PETA obtained excellent results, and thus should receive a fully compensatory fee.” LA Metro paid PETA after declining to appeal the district court’s order.