When City Council voted in August to impose a series of new regulations on strip clubs and other sexually oriented businesses, supporters predicted the ordinance could withstand any court challenge because it was modeled on bills that had already passed legal muster elsewhere. The city, DeGroote ruled, had no authority under state law to regulate political contributions.
The lawsuit makes a similar argument when it comes to city regulation of establishments that serve alcoholic beverages. Police would enforce the ordinance — something the lawsuit contends would result in unconstitutional warrantless searches.
Still, despite my personal misgivings about the negative aspects of adult entertainment, the approach taken by council and the administration of Mayor Tom Henry seems a bit inconsistent. Just for starters: On the very night council voted to regulate strip clubs it defeated a bill that would have banned so-called swingers clubs.
In other words, businesses profiting from partially clothed dancers are regulated far more heavily than those profiting from actual sexual intercourse. And the Champagne Club at Nuttman Ave. By way of contrast, the challenged ordinance subjects plaintiffs to substantial monetary penalties, as well as the suspension and revocation of a to engage in constitutionally protected activity.
One might wish the Supreme Court had not made Patrick Henrys out of pole dancers, and whether this issue is worth the thousands of taxpayer dollars it will cost to litigate will be a matter of legitimate debate. The city, for its part, has told the clubs it does not plan to enforce the ordinance before Jan. This column is the commentary of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of The News-Sentinel. Kevin Leininger at kleininger news-sentinel.
City Council's effort to regulate strip clubs and other sexually oriented businesses is on hold pending a legal challenge. Kevin Leininger. I'm interested in please check all that apply Daily News Breaking News.