A U.S. District Court Judge issued a permanent injunction against Rep. Ernest Istook's (R-OK) amendment to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004, saying that, "there is a clear public interest in preventing the chilling of speech on the basis of viewpoint." The permanent injunction prohibits the enforcement of the law. Istook's amendment, which was signed into law with the rest of the omnibus appropriations bill by the president, prohibits any transit agency receiving federal funds from running advertisements from groups that want to decriminalize marijuana or other Schedule I substances for medical or other purposes. On February 18, 2004, a coalition of national drug policy reform groups -- including the American Civil Liberties Union, Change the Climate, Inc., the Drug Policy Alliance, and the Marijuana Policy Project -- brought suit against Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta and the United States, because their free speech right to advocate on behalf of policy issues was being violated. The coalition argued, and the Judge later supported, that the law:

1. "imposes impermissible content- and viewpoint-based restrictions on speech in a public forum in an effort to silence one side's message in a serious political debate;
2. imposes restrictions that are unconstitutionally vague and overbroad; and
3. is an unlawful exercise of Congress' spending power because it violates an independent constitutional prohibition on the conditional grant of federal funds."

Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the government's attempt to censor the ads was "illegitimate and constitutionally impermissible." As a result, Change the Climate and other groups can again display their once rejected ads criticizing drug policies back on the subways and bus stop shelters. Read the full opinion.