HOAs that restrict actual speech should be unconstitutional.
Exactly, how can you have a conclave that suspends constitutional rights?
When I was looking for a new home last year I noticed that the homes in the area fell into four general categories:
1. Detached homes with an HOA -- mostly newer subdivisions
2. Detached homes with no HOA -- mainly older suburbs or rural areas
3. Townhome development with HOA -- mostly located in newer suburban area
4. Townhome development with no HOA -- mostly outlying subdivisions surrounded by rural areas
Every one of these had its advantages and disadvantages, but I can tell you that #4 was the absolute worst. These developments tended to look worn and shabby even if they were only a few years old. And many of them seem to have at least 25% more cars parked around them than there are spaces for them in garages and driveways. I decided that living with limited rules and regulations is great, but it is awful when you live that way in a place where you have no space between your home and your neighbor's home.
After lots of research, I found that #1 is the ideal situation if you need to live in an area where residential lots are less than a half-acre in size -- provided the HOA is a "benign" one. And by "benign" I mean it has almost no function other than to enforce rules and regulations and collect nominal fees for very limited common expenses. I found a perfect HOA that doesn't have any recreational facilities and doesn't even maintain the streets or collect garbage. It charges an annual fee of about $100 per home just to pay for the maintenance of an adjacent open space that is used for stormwater management and flood control.