š This fact may be outdated
An ordinance was passed in 1948 by Mayor George Phillips, jokingly making it 'illegal' to frown. It was never officially added to the city code and was unenforceable, though it gained national attention in 1987. It is not an active, enforceable law today.
It is illegal NOT to smile in Pocatello, Idaho!
The Grin and Bear It Law: Pocatello's Smiling Ordinance
A peculiar claim often circulates, suggesting that in Pocatello, Idaho, it is illegal to not smile. This factoid conjures images of citizens forced to wear grins under threat of legal action. But is there any truth behind this widely shared, eyebrow-raising ordinance?
The short answer is: not anymore, and arguably, not really even back then. While the tale stems from a genuine historical event, the reality is far less legally binding than the legend implies. Itās a classic case of a local quirk blossoming into an international myth.
The Birth of a Bizarre Bylaw
Our story begins in 1948, a time when Pocatello was grappling with the aftermath of a particularly harsh winter. The cityās morale was low, and its reputation was perhaps a bit drab.
Enter Mayor George Phillips, a man with a sense of humor and a desire to uplift his community. He introduced a rather unconventional ordinance to the city's books. This decree, passed with a wink and a nod, declared it illegal to frown, grimace, scowl, or display any other facial expression that might reflect unfavorably upon the city.
It was a clear attempt to inject some much-needed cheer into the town. The mayor's intention was never to seriously prosecute residents for their facial expressions. It was a purely symbolic, tongue-in-cheek gesture designed to make people laugh and perhaps, genuinely lighten their spirits.
From Local Jest to National News
For decades, the "Smile Ordinance" remained a quaint, forgotten piece of local lore. It existed on the city's legislative records, a harmless relic of a bygone era, never enforced or taken seriously.
Then, in 1987, a local reporter stumbled upon the peculiar decree. The rediscovery ignited a media frenzy, catapulting Pocatello into the national spotlight. News outlets across the country were captivated by the idea of a city where gloom was against the law.
The story gained so much traction that the American Bankers Association even capitalized on it. They used the outdated ordinance in an advertising campaign, which ultimately led to Pocatello proudly declaring itself the "U.S. Smile Capital." The city embraced its newfound, quirky identity with gusto.
The Truth Behind the Grin
Despite its charming history and national recognition, it's crucial to understand the true legal standing of the "Smile Ordinance." While it was passed by the city council, it was never formally codified into the official city ordinances. This means it lacked the legal teeth required for actual enforcement.
It was, essentially, a resolution or proclamation rather than a statute with penalties. No one was ever arrested, fined, or prosecuted for failing to flash a smile. The spirit of the law was always about community pride and good humor, not authoritarian facial regulation.
Smiling On: A Modern Legacy
Today, the notion of compulsory smiling in Pocatello remains a fascinating piece of its history, but it holds no legal weight. The city, far from trying to enforce it, celebrates this unique aspect of its past. Pocatello frequently hosts "Smile Days," events where the spirit of the ordinance is honored with parades, festivals, and community gatherings.
During these celebrations, visitors might even encounter playful "mock arrests" for not smiling, serving as a humorous nod to the city's quirky legal legend. Itās a testament to how Pocatello has skillfully woven a simple, good-hearted municipal gesture into its enduring cultural fabric.
So, if you ever find yourself in Pocatello, Idaho, feel free to express yourself naturally. While a smile might earn you a friendly greeting, a frown won't land you in legal trouble. The city's famous "No Frowning" law is a delightful reminder of its creative past, not a current legal obligation.
