Did the Ninth Circuit err by holding that Oregon's prohibition of unannounced recordings—which expressly exempts recordings of police activity and discussions during certain felonies—is content neutral and thus constitutional under the First Amendment, in contravention of this Court's decisions in Reed v. Town of Gilbert and City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising and with the Fourth, Seventh, Eighth, and Tenth Circuits?

Even if Oregon's law is content neutral, does it fail intermediate scrutiny because it restricts unannounced audio recording in wholly public settings where privacy interests are minimal or non-existent?

Did the Ninth Circuit err by holding that Oregon's prohibition of unannounced recordings is content neutral and inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent?