NUDE DANCING ORDINANCE: CAM I, INC. V. LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOV’T (COA 10/5/200&

CAM I, INC. V. LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOV’T
GOVERNMENT: LOCAL ORDINANCE – EXOTIC DANCING 

2005-CA-000085
PUBLISHED: AFFIRMING IN PART AND REVERSING IN PART
PANEL: MOORE, PRESIDING; COMBS & HOWARD CONCUR
COUNTY: JEFFERSON
DATE RENDERED: 10/05/2007

CA upheld the constitutionality of the Louisville/Metro "nude dancing" ordinance.  The right to associate for expressive purposes, however, is not absolute. ‘Infringements on that right may be justified by regulations adopted to serve compelling state interests, unrelated to the suppression of ideas, that cannot be achieved through means significantly less restrictive of associational freedoms.’”  Local governments are permitted to “rely, in part, on ‘appeal to common sense,’” in enacting regulations governing adult entertainment businesses.  Local government “may regulate speech when necessary to advance legitimate state interests, but the First Amendment prohibits the government from regulating speech in ways that favor some viewpoints or ideas at the expense of others.”  For example, “[s]ix feet is sufficiently close for a person to view and appreciate an artistic dance performance.

Digested by Michael Stevens

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.