It is rare enough, these days, to find a story that everyone should be able to agree with and support, especially when it comes to federal court decisions and constitutional law. But today we actually have one, so we're going to ignore the frenzy of wheeling and dealing currently happening within the Republican Party over their Medicaid-gutting new budget bill and instead focus on a story it's almost impossible not to smile about.

The facts of the case come from a small town, where for some reason the town's "municipal code enforcement officer" decided to become an art critic, as it were. The town -- Conway, New Hampshire -- which assumably is run by either petty tyrants or just garden-variety curmudgeons, demanded a local business remove a bright and cheerful mural that had just been painted by local high school students. The business fought back, and a judge just agreed with the owner and told the town to knock it off and chill out (I am paraphrasing the legal language used, I admit...).

Here's the basic story:

After [owner Sean] Young bought Leavitt's Country Bakery in the spring of 2021, it became known as one of New Hampshire's top doughnut shops. Its most popular pastries include handmade apple fritters, honey-dipped doughnuts and chocolate-frosted doughnuts.

For years, the front of the shop was red and featured the bakery's logo, an image of a blackbird sitting atop a pie. But in the spring of 2022, an art teacher from Kennett High School in North Conway, New Hampshire, was looking for a place in the community where her students could start a project. Young offered the front of his bakery.

Students wanted to create something that reflected the east New Hampshire region, where skiers flock in the winter and hikers and water tubers come in the summer. They never thought people would interpret the mural as a sign....

The result showed a line of pastries -- including a chocolate-frosted doughnut with colorful sprinkles, a meringue cookie, a chocolate chip cookie, a strawberry frosted doughnut, a sugar cookie and a Boston crème -- that represented the nearby Mount Washington Valley mountains. In the mural, a sun rises over the pastries, creating bright rays.

The mural, as the photos accompanying the article show (or check out their web page), can really only be described in happy terms. It is colorful, inventive, and celebratory, to use just three. The shop has a smallish triangular gable in the front, which has a companion piece to the main mural painted on it. This triangular piece contains, as a small part of it in the center, a very discreet logo with the name of the shop. Then on a much bigger front-facing wall on the roof above this, the main mural of all the doughnuts and muffins and rolls is displayed, with a rising sun (assumably, since doughnuts are such a morning food) spreading its yellow and orange rays through a bright blue sky above the confections. There are no words or logos on the main mural at all.

At worst, it might be called "kitschy" or even (in a negative way) "too cute." But I'd be willing to bet that the reaction from the vast majority of the public who sees it would instead be cheerful and delighted -- especially if they knew it had been painted by local high-school students.

However, a week after the mural was officially unveiled, the municipal code enforcement officer told Young the whole thing qualified as a "sign," and at 91 square feet was four times larger than what was officially allowed. This came with the threat of having to pay a fine of $275 per day if the "sign" remained up. Young appealed to the zoning board, which denied his appeal. They threatened to start levying the fines. So Young sued in federal court. He argued that it was actually a case of free speech, since the mural only depicted the products sold at his store, and did not contain the name of the shop. It was art, not a commercial sign, in other words.

This week, the judge agreed with the doughnut shop:

A judge wrote in an order that Conway's enforcement of its ordinance against the painting is "unconstitutional" and "operationally illogical," ruling that the mural can remain in front of the shop.... Judge Joseph Laplante wrote in his order Monday that the town's enforcement of its ordinance had "no rational connection to any of [the town's] stated interests" and "would not pass any level of scrutiny."

Score one for the baker and the student artists, and zero for the curmudgeons. Also, score one for the First Amendment and free speech. As I began with, this seems to be one of those issues beyond our political divide, where common sense should have ruled from the very start: "Jeez... local kids painted it, it's not doing anyone any harm... and gosh, they do have great doughnuts...." Sadly, this was not the case, but at least it did have a happy conclusion in court this week.

Because the entire story, from the outside looking in, is so downright cartoonish (it feels like a plot for a cheesy made-for-TV Hallmark movie, doesn't it?), we are going to turn our final commentary over to two noted legal scholars, for their take on what this victory for the First Amendment truly means to them....

From South Park, Eric Cartman:
"Sweet!"

From The Simpsons, Homer Simpson:
"Mmmmm... doughnuts... [drooling noises]..."

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant