Laserfiche WebLink
94 Time, Place, and Manner Regulation of Business Activity <br />Ie plurality opinion for this court case set out three Fi t <br />nendment criteria that <br />businesses must satisfy in <br />rs <br />ordinances regulating adult entertainment <br />order to be Constitutionally upheld. <br />1. Regulations must be motivated not because of a distaste for the <br />speech itself, but by a desire to eliminate its adverse effects. <br />2. Properly motivated legislation may be unconstitutional if it <br />severey restricts First Amendment rights_ <br />3. A properly motivated ordinance with only a limited impact on free <br />expression may be unconstitutional if the municipality cannot <br />demonstrate an adequate factual basis for its conclusion that the <br />ordinance will accomplish its object of eliminating the adverse <br />effect of adult businesses . <br />The limitations established by these criteria are best illustrated by <br />analysis V the invalidation of Atlanta, Georgia's Adult Entertainment <br />Ordinance This ordinance prohibited adult entertainment businesses <br />from locating within 1,000 feet of any other such use, within 500 feet <br />of any residential zoning district, or within 500 feet of any church <br />or place used for religious worship. The ordinance also restricted <br />all new adult entertainment businesses to three zoning districts. The <br />Atlanta ordinance further required the amortization of certain <br />existing businesses. <br />hough factual evidence was presented in support of Atlanta's <br />,,,dinance, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the ordinance violated <br />the first two criteria cited in Younq. The Court first found evidence <br />of an improper motive in enacting the ordinance. Minutes of a zoning <br />review board meeting indicated that the board mould help citizens <br />opposed to the conduct of adult businesses to ."zone then out of <br />business". At the meeting an assistant city attorney indicated that <br />the proposed ordinance was the "strongest vehicle toward elimination" <br />of these businesses and the city was "hoping for complete eradication" <br />of adult businesses. The court also found that the locational <br />restrictions of the ordinance would significantly reduce and possibly <br />eliminate public access to adult businesses. The court had ruled in <br />YOUM that "pornography zoning' is constitutional ugly if "the market <br />=or this cooaodity is essentially unrestrained" The locational <br />restrictions and amortization requirements in Atlanta were deemed too <br />severe a restriction on the First Amendment rights of adult <br />businesses. <br />2. Weinstein, Alan; Regulating Pornograohy: Recent Leqal Trends; <br />(Land Use Law; February, 1982;) p.4 <br />Ibid. p.4 <br />lbid. p.4 <br />EVER00276 <br />