Posted by: Patricia Salkin | October 28, 2016

Fed. Dist. Court in IL Finds Ordinance Banning Alcohol in Adult Establishment was Unconstitutional

In 2004 and 2005, Defendant Village of Bridgeview passed Ordinance Nos. 04-54 and 05-11, respectively. Together, the ordinances imposed alcohol and location restrictions on new adult establishments, but exempted PoleKatz Chicago Gentleman’s Club, the only existing adult establishment in the Village. Unable to open an alcohol-serving adult cabaret, Plaintiff 7421 West 100th Place Corporation sought a declaratory judgment that Ordinance Nos. 04-54 and 05-11 were unconstitutional under the First Amendment, as well as other relief, including an injunction enjoining Defendant from further enforcement.

In evaluating the constitutionality of an adult use alcohol restriction, the court determined that it did not need determine whether strict scrutiny was necessary, because the Ordinance No. 04-54 alcohol restriction failed under even intermediate scrutiny. As Ordinance No. 04-54 contended, “the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises of an adult use” truly “exasperates the adverse secondary effects of such businesses.” Thus the court found there was no principled reason, at least on this record, for exempting the adult establishment that has operated in the Village for the past twelve years. Therefore, the court declared that Ordinance No. 04-54, Section 1, Article 10-52-3 was unconstitutional. The Court declined, however, to invalidate Ordinance No. 04-54 in its entirety, as it could be severed from the remainder of Ordinance No. 04-54, which imposed discrete, separate requirements that could stand on their own.

The court also determined that the current record left too many factual questions unanswered for the court to provide a legitimate determination as to whether District I-2A provided a “reasonable opportunity” to disseminate adult speech. Accordingly, it held that it cannot conduct a proper analysis to ascertain whether Ordinance No. 05-11 violated the First Amendment. Both summary judgment motions as they related to Ordinance No. 05-11 were therefore denied.

7421 West 100th Place Corp. v. Village of Bridgeview, 2016 WL 5373062 (ND IL 9/26/16)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: