2/68 CA Art I: Speech, records

California Article I (part 2): Speech, petition, open government and religion

Lesson 2 of 68 · Speech, religion and public comment · 15 min read

On this page (7 sections)
  1. Section 2: Speech and press
  2. Section 3: Petition, assembly and open government
  3. Section 4: Religion
  4. In Williams
  5. Common misconceptions
  6. Check yourself
  7. Sources cited on this page

These three sections are the ones a Williams resident is most likely to use: speaking at a council meeting, asking for records, petitioning the city, or objecting to religious favoritism.

Key takeaways

  • §2 protects speech as an affirmative right and reaches some private property, like large shopping centers.
  • §3(a) gives the right to "instruct" representatives, petition and assemble.
  • §3(b) makes open meetings and public records a constitutional right and tells courts to read access laws broadly.
  • §3(b)(7) requires every city to comply with the Brown Act and the Public Records Act.
  • §4 bans religious "preference" as well as establishment.

Section 2: Speech and press

Official textCal. Const., Art. I, §2 — Liberty of Speech and of the Press—Newspersons’ Refusal to Disclose Information Sources Not Adjudged in Contemptread in context: Cal. Const., Art. I, §2 — Liberty of Speech and of the Press—Newspersons’ Refusal to Disclose Information Sources Not Adjudged in Contempt

(a) Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.

(b) A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed, shall not be adjudged in contempt by a judicial, legislative, or administrative body, or any other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or employed for publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.

Nor shall a radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any person who has been so connected or employed, be so adjudged in contempt for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or employed for news or news commentary purposes on radio or television, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.

As used in this subdivision, “unpublished information” includes information not disseminated to the public by the person from whom disclosure is sought, whether or not related information has been disseminated and includes, but is not limited to, all notes, outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not itself disseminated to the public through a medium of communication, whether or not published information based upon or related to such material has been disseminated. [As amended June 3, 1980.]

Source: California Constitution as published by the California State Senate (current through November 5, 2024) Verified1

A right, not just a limit. The First Amendment says what Congress may not do; §2(a) says "Every person may freely speak, write and publish" Verified12.

Shopping centers. In Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center (1979) 23 Cal.3d 899, the court held "sections 2 and 3 of article I of the California Constitution protect speech and petitioning, reasonably exercised, in shopping centers even when the centers are privately owned" Verified3. The U.S. Supreme Court let that stand (PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980)) Verified4. Later, "the right to free speech granted by article I, section 2 of the California Constitution includes the right to urge customers in a shopping mall to boycott one of the stores in the mall" (Fashion Valley Mall, LLC v. NLRB (2007) 42 Cal.4th 850) Verified5.

Compelled speech. California's speech right can be "broader" than the First Amendment's. A marketing order that didn't implicate the First Amendment "does indeed implicate such a right under article I" (Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Lyons (2000) 24 Cal.4th 468) Verified6.

Shield law (§2(b)). Journalists can't be held in contempt for refusing to disclose sources or unpublished information Verified1.

"Being responsible for the abuse." Our reading: the right doesn't protect defamation or other false statements of fact that harm someone.

Section 3: Petition, assembly and open government

Official textCal. Const., Art. I, §3 — Right to Assemble and to Petition—Right of Access to Government Informationread in context: Cal. Const., Art. I, §3 — Right to Assemble and to Petition—Right of Access to Government Information

(a) The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition government for redress of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good.

(b) (1) The people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business, and, therefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny.

(2) A statute, court rule, or other authority, including those in effect on the effective date of this subdivision, shall be broadly construed if it furthers the people’s right of access, and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access. A statute, court rule, or other authority adopted after the effective date of this subdivision that limits the right of access shall be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.

(3) Nothing in this subdivision supersedes or modifies the right of privacy guaranteed by Section 1 or affects the construction of any statute, court rule, or other authority to the extent that it protects that right to privacy, including any statutory procedures governing discovery or disclosure of information concerning the official performance or professional qualifications of a peace officer.

(4) Nothing in this subdivision supersedes or modifies any provision of this Constitution, including the guarantees that a person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or denied equal protection of the laws, as provided in Section 7.

(5) This subdivision does not repeal or nullify, expressly or by implication, any constitutional or statutory exception to the right of access to public

records or meetings of public bodies that is in effect on the effective date of this subdivision, including, but not limited to, any statute protecting the confidentiality of law enforcement and prosecution records.

(6) Nothing in this subdivision repeals, nullifies, supersedes, or modifies protections for the confidentiality of proceedings and records of the Legislature, the Members of the Legislature, and its employees, committees, and caucuses provided by Section 7 of Article IV, state law, or legislative rules adopted in furtherance of those provisions; nor does it affect the scope of permitted discovery in judicial or administrative proceedings regarding deliberations of the Legislature, the Members of the Legislature, and its employees, committees, and caucuses.

(7) In order to ensure public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, as specified in paragraph (1), each local agency is hereby required to comply with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) and the Ralph M. Brown Act (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code), and with any subsequent statutory enactment amending either act, enacting a successor act, or amending any successor act that contains finding demonstrating that the statutory enactment furthers the purposes of this section. [As amended June 3, 2014.]

Source: California Constitution as published by the California State Senate (current through November 5, 2024) Verified1

§3(a): Instruct, petition, assemble. California adds the right "to instruct their representatives" Verified1. Public comment at council meetings is the most common way Williams residents do this; the Brown Act requires a chance to address the council on agenda items (Gov. Code §54954.3) Verified7.

§3(b)(1): Access is a constitutional right. "The meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny" Verified1. The section's current text shows "[As amended June 3, 2014.]" Verified1.

§3(b)(2): The tiebreaker. Access laws "shall be broadly construed if it furthers the people's right of access, and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access" Verified1. The Supreme Court applied it to hold that a county's GIS database is a public record: "such databases are public records that, unless otherwise exempt, must be" disclosed (Sierra Club v. Superior Court (2013) 57 Cal.4th 157) Verified8.

§3(b)(3)–(6): Limits. Access doesn't override privacy (§1), due process (§7), or existing exceptions such as law enforcement records Verified1.

§3(b)(7): Cities must comply. "Each local agency is hereby required to comply with the California Public Records Act ... and the Ralph M. Brown Act" Verified1. The cited CPRA location (Gov. Code §6250) has since been recodified; the act now starts at Gov. Code §7920.000 Verified9. Since the duty is in the constitution, a city can't refuse because the state hasn't paid for it. Our reading: that's the practical effect of putting the mandate in §3(b)(7) rather than leaving it to a reimbursable statute.

Private-device records. "Here, we hold that when a city employee uses a personal account to communicate about the conduct of public business, the writings may be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act" (City of San Jose v. Superior Court (2017) 2 Cal.5th 608) Verified10. Our reading: a Williams council member's texts about city business can be requested even if sent from a personal phone.

Section 4: Religion

Official textCal. Const., Art. I, §4 — Liberty of Conscienceread in context: Cal. Const., Art. I, §4 — Liberty of Conscience

Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed. This liberty of conscience does not excuse acts that are licentious or inconsistent with the peace or safety of the State. The Legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. A person is not incompetent to be a witness or juror because of his or her opinions on religious beliefs. [New section adopted November 5, 1974.]

Source: California Constitution as published by the California State Senate (current through November 5, 2024) Verified1

"Without discrimination or preference." California bans preference, not just establishment. A key part of §4 "is identical to the establishment clause of the First Amendment" (Sands v. Morongo Unified School Dist. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 863) Verified11, but the preference clause adds more.

Government displays. The court ordered Los Angeles not to display "a lighted, single-barred cross on the Los Angeles City Hall" (Fox v. City of Los Angeles (1978) 22 Cal.3d 792) Verified12.

School graduation prayer. "Religious invocations and benedictions at public high school graduation ceremonies are constitutionally impermissible" (Sands v. Morongo Unified School Dist. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 863) Verified11.

Free exercise and neutral laws. A church-affiliated employer challenged the Women's Contraception Equity Act under both constitutions and lost (Catholic Charities of Sacramento, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 527) Verified13.

Funding. Article XVI, §5 separately bans public money for any sectarian purpose; see Public finance Verified1.

In Williams

  • Public comment. §3(a) plus the Brown Act's comment right Verified7. The council can set reasonable time limits but can't bar criticism of itself (§54954.3(c)) Verified7.
  • Records. Ask the city clerk Verified14. The city must respond within 10 days (Gov. Code §7922.535) Verified15. Your reason for asking doesn't matter (§7921.300) Verified16. See the Public Records Act guide.
  • Invocations. Council prayer is governed federally by Town of Greece Verified17, but §4's "preference" language can reach further. Our reading: rotating, nonsectarian practices are safer under §4.
  • Sign rules. City sign ordinances must survive both §2 and the First Amendment. See First Amendment.

Common misconceptions

  • "Private property means no speech rights." Not for large shopping centers in California Verified3.
  • "Open government is just a statute the Legislature could repeal." It's in the constitution, and §3(b)(7) binds cities Verified1.
  • "Public comment means the council has to answer." The Brown Act generally bars action on non-agenda items; it doesn't require responses Verified18.

Check yourself

Pick an answer for each question. You will see right away if it is right, and why.

Question 1. What does §3(b)(2) tell courts to do with laws that limit access?

Show the answer and why

Construe them narrowly Verified1.

Question 2. Which two statutes does §3(b)(7) require every local agency to follow?

Show the answer and why

The California Public Records Act and the Ralph M. Brown Act Verified1.

Question 3. Can a privately owned shopping center in California ban all petitioning?

Show the answer and why

No. Robins v. Pruneyard protects reasonable speech and petitioning there Verified3.

Question 4. What does §4 ban that the First Amendment doesn't say expressly?

Show the answer and why

Religious "preference" Verified1.

Question 5. Spot the problem: What's missing from this sample agenda?
Sample

Sample regular council agenda: 1. Call to order. 2. Consent calendar. 3. Budget vote. 4. Adjourn. (No public comment item.)

Show the answer and why

Answer: A chance for the public to address the council.

The Brown Act requires a chance to address the council on agenda items, and public comment is the most common way Williams residents use their right to petition. It doesn't require the council to respond or to vote on requests.

From this lesson: “Public comment at council meetings is the most common way Williams residents do this; the Brown Act requires a chance to address the council on agenda items (Gov.”

Sources cited on this page

  1. Constitutions of California and the United States, 2025-26 edition (PDF) (California State Senate; official; accessed 2026-10-17) California Constitution as last amended November 5, 2024. ↗
  2. The Bill of Rights: A Transcription (U.S. National Archives; official; accessed 2026-10-17) ↗
  3. Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center (1979) 23 Cal.3d 899 (CourtListener / Harvard Caselaw Access Project (scan of California Reports); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Opinion text read on a free copy, not the official reporter. Confirm before relying on it. ↗
  4. PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980) (Cornell Legal Information Institute (copy of U.S. Supreme Court opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Opinion text read on Cornell's Legal Information Institute (free copy, not the official U.S. Reports). ↗
  5. Fashion Valley Mall, LLC v. NLRB (2007) 42 Cal.4th 850 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  6. Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Lyons (2000) 24 Cal.4th 468 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  7. Government Code §54954.3 (Brown Act: public comment) (California.Public.Law (copy of California statute); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Unofficial copy of the statute, read directly. Confirm on leginfo before relying on it. ↗
  8. Sierra Club v. Superior Court (2013) 57 Cal.4th 157 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  9. Government Code §7920.000 (California Public Records Act: title) (California.Public.Law (copy of California statute); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Unofficial copy of the statute, read directly. Confirm on leginfo before relying on it. ↗
  10. City of San Jose v. Superior Court (2017) 2 Cal.5th 608 (Judicial Council of California (official slip opinion archive); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Opinion text read directly (slip opinion or free copy, not the bound official reporter). Confirm before relying on it. ↗
  11. Sands v. Morongo Unified School Dist. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 863 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  12. Fox v. City of Los Angeles (1978) 22 Cal.3d 792 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  13. Catholic Charities of Sacramento, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 527 (Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School (copy of California opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read in the Caselaw Access Project copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  14. City Clerk (public records requests, Form 700 filing officer) (City of Williams; official; accessed 2026-10-29) City Clerk's office, 810 E Street (P.O. Box 310). Phone (530) 235-3274, or (530) 473-2955 Ext. 111. This page has an online Public Records Request form and links a PDF request form. ↗
  15. Government Code §7922.535 (California Public Records Act: 10-day response) (California.Public.Law (copy of California statute); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Unofficial copy of the statute, read directly. Confirm on leginfo before relying on it. ↗
  16. Government Code §7921.300 (California Public Records Act: purpose of request irrelevant) (California.Public.Law (copy of California statute); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Unofficial copy of the statute, read directly. Confirm on leginfo before relying on it. ↗
  17. Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. 565 (2014) (Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School (copy of U.S. Supreme Court opinion); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Full opinion text read on the LII copy. Quotes on this site were machine-checked against that text. ↗
  18. Government Code §54954.2 (Brown Act: agenda posting, 72 hours) (California.Public.Law (copy of California statute); unofficial / third-party; accessed 2026-10-23) Unofficial copy of the statute, read directly. Confirm on leginfo before relying on it. ↗

Page last updated: · Site last built: