One person’s protest mural is one city’s illegal sign. Lawyers for activist Jim Roos and the city of St. Louis were before a panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday morning arguing about the constitutionality of the city’s sign code.

Pictured here, Roos, left, and his lawyer, Michael Bindas, share a laugh after arguments outside Washington University School of Law, where Wednesday's arguments were held.

Tagged with: 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Jim Roos Washington University School of Law

Eminent domain activist Jim Roos and the city of St. Louis are one step closer to getting a resolution on a question that has been plaguing both parties since 2007. Can Roos legally keep up a three-story mural protesting the use of eminent domain on one of his buildings? On Tuesday, Roos settled one part of his legal battle to preserve the 30-foot-tall mural. The city's Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority apologized to Roos for the actions of its employees in denying him a sign permit. But the letter makes no mention of free speech or Roos' right to protest government action by painting a massive circle-and-slash image overlooking Interstates 44 and 55.

Tagged with: eminent domain free speech Jim Roos protest mural