Public disturbance noise provisions, while perhaps easier to enforce, may raise some constitutional questions. Are the provisions sufficiently detailed to place a person on notice of their prohibitions? Are the prohibitions so broad as to chill free speech?

There have been three appellate cases in recent years reviewing public disturbance noise provisions. In Everett v. O'Brien, 31 Wn. App. 319, 641 P.2d 714 (1982), and Seattle v. Eze, 111 Wn.2d 22, 759 P.2d 366 (1988), public disturbance type noise ordinances have been upheld; however, in Spokane v. Fischer, 110 Wn.2d 541, 754 P.2d 1241 (1988), an ordinance prohibiting frequent and habitual dog barking that disturbs or annoys any person and the neighborhood was found unconstitutionally vague.  (See Court Case Links)