Kerrville repealed its anti-solicitation ordinance after it was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court of appeals, but plaintiffs are still seeking to recover attorney’s fees for the civil rights violation.
The city is hoping the dispute will be dismissed without having to pay, since it repealed the underlying ordinance.
As previously reported, two residents and a local grassroots organization filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Kerrville in 2024 for passing an ordinance targeting canvassers, peddlers, and solicitors.
The suit was filed by residents Terri Hall and Rachel Vickers, alongside We The People: Liberty in Action, arguing that the Kerrville City Council passed the ordinance to stifle political opposition.
Kerrville’s ordinance limited all three groups to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., restricted trespassing on property where a “No Solicitors” or similar signage is visible, and restricted working on public sidewalks.
The lawsuit specifically argued the ordinance makes the “price of participating in civic matters too costly and burdensome” for those challenging incumbents. Plaintiffs claimed the ordinance violated their constitutional rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The district court agreed, issuing an injunction blocking several challenged provisions of the ordinance from being enforced.
In December 2025, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans held that multiple provisions of Kerrville’s ordinance were unconstitutional under the First Amendment, burdening core political and religious speech more than necessary.
However, the Fifth Circuit found the lower court injunction to be overbroad. The injunction was therefore vacated and the district court was directed to issue a new injunction that only blocks the relevant provisions from enforcement against the named plaintiffs in the case—rather than blocking them entirely.
Following the Fifth Circuit decision, Kerrville reportedly repealed the challenged ordinance provisions, and the case was stayed for parties to engage in settlement discussions. They hoped to resolve the matter without further litigation, but were unable to reach a resolution.
Plaintiffs are now asking the court to reopen the case so that proceedings consistent with the Fifth Circuit mandate may resume at the district court level.
They are also seeking attorney’s fees because the city was found to have violated the First Amendment rights of Liberty in Action members.
The city claims the dispute is over because it repealed the ordinances. Plaintiffs contend that past civil rights violations are still legally redressable, even if the underlying ordinances were repealed.
If you or anyone you know has information regarding court cases, please contact our tip line: scorecardtips@protonmail.com.
