State Supreme Court Rules on Azusa Case : Laws Barring Fortunetelling Rejected

In a decision that will affect ordinances in several cities, including Los Angeles, the state Supreme Court ruled today that laws flatly barring fortunetelling violate the state Constitution’s free speech protections.

Acknowledging that fortunetelling is of “dubious” value, the court unanimously rejected the San Gabriel Valley city of Azusa’s claim that its law is constitutional because it does not bar all fortunetelling, just fortunetelling for which a fee is charged.

“If we were to accept the city’s theory,” Justice Stanley Mosk wrote for the court, “a lecture for or against Marxism, abortion, nuclear power or racial supremacy would be commercial speech if people paid an admission charge to hear it, because the lecture would complete the transaction.

“Such a result would be unprecedented and untenable.”

Mosk noted, however, that “many persons practicing the ‘art’ of fortunetelling are engaging in fraudulent activity” and thus are covered by laws against fraud.

Suit Filed Against Azusa

The case stemmed from a suit filed against Azusa when it invoked its ordinance to stop Gypsy Fatima Stevens, founder and minister of the Spiritual Psychic Science Church of Truth Inc. from working as a fortuneteller.

“That some--even a majority--may find this mode of communication distasteful, ridiculous or even corrupt is irrelevant to constitutional concerns,” Mosk wrote.

Mosk pointed out that many others predict the future--from newspaper astrologers to economists, racing handicappers, pollsters who predict the outcome of elections and clergymen who “describe the concept of a hereafter.” Under Azusa’s ordinance, these practices could be banned.

Several other cities, among them Los Angeles, have similar ordinances aimed at protecting consumers from being bilked by phony fortunetellers. Under the court’s ruling, those ordinances are threatened.