Judge Rules in Favor of New Hampshire Bakery in Fight Over Donut Mural
Conway, New Hampshire's attempt to force a local bakery to take down the mural "does not withstand any level of constitutional scrutiny," a judge ruled this week.

A New Hampshire bakery has won a crucial victory in its fight to preserve a mural of donuts and other baked goods above its storefront. While town officials have attempted to force the bakery to remove the mural, citing zoning regulations, a federal court ruled on Monday that the city cannot enforce its sign rules against the bakery.
In 2022, Sean Young, the owner of Leavitt's Country Bakery, a popular bakery in Conway, New Hampshire, collaborated with a local high school art class to paint a mural for the bakery's storefront. The students' mural depicted baked goods forming the shape of a mountain range, with a multicolored sunrise in the background. Initially, the mural didn't cause any controversy—and it was even covered positively by local media. However, about a week after being installed, Conway's Code Enforcement Officer Jeremy Gibbs told Young that the mural violated town zoning rules.
According to the town, the mural violated local laws that regulate signs. Because the mural depicted baked goods—which the bakery obviously sells—it was deemed a "sign," not a mural, and signs are subject to rules limiting their size. While the town's rules define a sign incredibly broadly, in practice, the town only enforces its sign regulations on speech it perceives as commercial in nature. If Leavitt's Country Bakery had erected a mural of just a sunrise, for example, the town would have no problem with it, even though the rules on the books would apply to both. "Imposing different burdens on speech depending on who is speaking and what is being said is content based and speaker based restriction on free speech," reads a 2023 complaint from the Institute for Justice, a public interest law group, which represented the bakery in its lawsuit against Conway.
On Monday, a judge agreed. While the judge noted that the town's sign rules, as written, don't necessarily violate the Constitution, the selective nature of the town's enforcement does. "The court rules only that Conway's application of its sign code, and specifically its enforcement of the sign code to the Leavitt's sign in the particular manner it employed in this case, does not withstand any level of constitutional scrutiny," reads a ruling from District Judge Joseph N. Laplante enjoining the town from forcing Young to remove the mural. "Although the display may have violated the sign code because of its size, Gibbs' determination was based on a rationale with no textual basis in the sign code, which does not distinguish between displays based on content."
The ruling is a major victory for the bakery's ability to paint a mural on its own property—without government meddling. "Towns can certainly regulate signs. They can regulate the size of signs or the number of signs permitted, but what they can't do is pick and choose what signs to regulate based on what they depict," Institute for Justice Attorney Betsy Sanz said in a Monday press release. "Today's ruling makes it clear that what Conway was doing was discriminating against certain signs based on what officials thought they depicted. And that's a clear First Amendment violation."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Don’t dunk on the donut shop.
Looks like the IJ found a hole in their zoning code.
I bet the ruling really frosted their asses.
Clearly a case of "we don't want to do our actual job so let's go after something else" And hate to say it, but this Article is also that.
A donut shop ? In New Hampshire ? Don't you have some clothes to wash? mabye mow the lawn ?
A donut shop !! in New Hampshire?
It's the Institute for Justice. They do good work. I'd rather see these articles than sob stories about getting FAFSA money.
Agreed.
That's because tons of kids being deprived of an education can hardly pull at the heartstrings of a Luddite dropout like yourself.
And of course you realized how stupid your post is so you had to tell people they do good work. Because to 11 out of 10 people this is triviality elavated to important. .I like the sign.
New Hampshire has a well-deserved reputation for being a Libertarian state. It has no income tax and no sales tax. The state government has few employees. It doesn't even require you to get car insurance. Most towns, including Conway, have Town Halls to deal with most governmental decisions -- direct democracy.
The MAGA trolls who defend Trump's Fascist tendencies by claiming, "We voted for it!" are hypocrites if they defend the donut shop. The people literally vote for stuff like this in New Hampshire. I am personally happy that the donut shop won; would that MAGA trolls were more consistent in their opposition to government abuse.
This is a tiny victory but a libertarian outcome and good on Emma for reporting on it.
It was clearly content-based zoning which is a First Amendment problem. But a lot of MAGAts love restrictive zoning to promote grifting. Donald Trump even endorsed it in the 2016 campaign. Once again, MAGA means hypocrite.
Does the picture speak or identify-as a particular race, color, religion or national origin or what? It's great to see government power get curbed in general but it's rather bogus this was handled at the federal level. Does the 1A say there can't be any legislation about public pictures now or what?
It looks to me like donuts and muffins.
It should. My copy of the Constitution doesn't say "Congress shall make no law... unless someone is trying to make a buck". Signs should only be limited if they can be shown to be doing concrete harm to someone, and "Ooh, it's ugly!" doesn't count. Provably false or grossly misleading advertisements can be punished as fraud. Otherwise, I'm pretty much an absolutist.
Any gentlemen's clubs in that town?
I wonder if they are working on new signs. I mean, murals.
I don't know, but it definitely has a socialist liquor store, one of 67 run by the Libertarian Paradise of New Hampshire! They are famous for having prices that are lower than private competitors in nearby Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont. Another Libertarian Paradise, Alaska, owns and operates a railroad and put in bids on oil leases; it dropped them when it couldn't find anyone interested in drilling.
I'm so glad New Hampshire is dedicating their time to this instead of rounding up any border jumpers and deporting them.
Priorities, y'know?
New Hampshire barely has a state government at all. The State Police there only have about 400 troopers, and they have limited jurisdiction in larger towns who have their own police force. New Hampshire's border with Canada is 58 miles long, with only one border crossing. The US side of the border is mostly uninhabited forests there.
....k.
Still, priorities. We knew Team Biden hid these non-Americans in every little dairy farm it could find, Find them, flush them out, and send them packing to CECOT.
IF the bakery mural had included a multi colored rainbow and a trans woman it would have been perfectly acceptable to the town council.
When the mural went up in June 2022, it attracted a lot of compliments and visitors, including one from a town zoning officer.
''I'm thrilled that the students' artwork can remain up, I'm thrilled that my First Amendment rights have been vindicated, and I'm thrilled that the community can continue to enjoy the beautiful piece of art,'' Young said in a statement. ''I think our mural is a wonderful depiction of everything that makes the Mount Washington Valley such a great place to live.''
There is a pink-frosted donut, with sprinkles. What more could you want?
Pyrrhic victory at best. Now the town will just enforce the zoning law equally and the sign will come down.
10 000 residents, maybe closing the shop would get the litigious bastards run out of town.
Rats to Camp for "donuts" in that first paragraph.
Presumably, the readership of Reason doesn't consist of small children, who're incapable of dealing with silent letters as they slowly plow through the text, with frequent pauses to rest their tired lips. Please acknowledge this fact by spelling it "doughnut", instead of using a phonetic abomination devised by restaurant chains to appeal to semiliterates and infants.
I hate to be that guy, but I think you meant they "ploughed" through the text?
No, New Hampshire is in the U.S. and we spell it "plow." And I completely concur with Old Smokin' Egg's comment. Seeing the word 'donut' in print in what should be a professional article is like nails on a chalkboard.
Okay , fake posturing pseudo-Libertarians, why do you say this and yet let something like but let Serrano's Piss Christ have a pass as free speech
[The photograph is of a small plastic crucifix submerged in what appears to be an orange liquid. The artist described the substance as his own urine in a glass]
One reassn is that for all your pretended interest and knowledge about political matters you don't realize the classic "Let's spend time arguing about a donut shop so we don't have to do our jobs"
Serrano got an NEA grant. Is the NH bakery similarly subsidized?
Tar and feather the zoning board immediately.
Or execute them?