Pictured above is Silk, a club owned by one of the plaintiffs in the case. Source: onmilwaukee.com

Before 2012, the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin required strip clubs to obtain one of three business licenses: if the club included both alcohol and nudity, the club would require both a liquor license and a “tavern-amusement license”; a dry strip club required either a “theater license” or a “public-entertainment club license.” Continue Reading $435,000 Damage Award to Milwaukee Strip Club Upheld

In the continuing saga of the plaza of the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse here in Denver, last Friday, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.  Specifically, the Tenth Circuit upheld the district court’s treatment of the courthouse plaza as a traditional public forum—the Second Judicial District had earlier waived its argument that the plaza was anything but a traditional public forum—and that the district court did not err in finding that the content neutral regulation of speech in the plaza was insufficiently narrowly tailored. Continue Reading Tenth Circuit Upholds Grant of Preliminary Injunction in Denver Courthouse Case

Last week, in a case we previously covered here, a federal district court in Colorado considered whether plaintiffs have standing to seek permanent injunctive relief when the defendant has stipulated that it has no intention of enforcing a restriction on expressive conduct.

In Verlo v. City and County of Denver, plaintiffs desired to distribute leaflets regarding jury nullification in the plaza outside of Denver’s Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse.  However, the Colorado Second Judicial District, which operates in the courthouse, issued an order essentially prohibiting all expressive activities in the courthouse plaza.  The City and County of Denver, the entity responsible for enforcing the order, stipulated that it would not do so.  Furthermore, the city stipulated that it would not interfere with plaintiffs’ peaceful distribution of leaflets in the plaza.  Notwithstanding the stipulation, plaintiffs sued the city and the Colorado Second Judicial District, claiming that the order was an unconstitutional restriction on their First Amendment rights.  In an earlier decision, the federal district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, barring enforcement of the order. Continue Reading Denver Courthouse Case Continued: Plaintiffs Lack Standing

Protesters outside a New Hampshire reproductive health clinic. Source: watchdog.org.

Last week, a federal district court judge in New Hampshire ruled that a group of protesters lacked standing to challenge a state law prohibiting them from entering within a 25-foot radius of the entrance to an abortion clinic. The law, which was similar to a Massachusetts law that the U.S. Supreme Court struck down in 2014, stated that “[n]o person shall knowingly enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk adjacent to a reproductive health care facility within a radius up to 25 feet of any portion of an entrance, exit, or driveway of a reproductive health care facility.”  The law also required clinics to “clearly demarcate” the buffer zone. Continue Reading Abortion Protesters Lack Standing to Challenge New Hampshire Law

For those wading through the sign regulation muddle post Reed v. Town of Gilbert, check out my latest article in The Urban Lawyer, Sign Regulation After Reed: Suggestions for Coping with Legal Uncertainty.  Co-authored with Professor Alan Weinstein of Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, the article provides practical advice to local government planners and lawyers looking to prepare sign code amendments that can withstand a constitutional challenge.

 

xsc73

The Hitching Post in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.  

In an opinion issued last week, a federal district court in Idaho found that a wedding services business, Hitching Post, which refused to officiate same-sex marriages on religious grounds, did not have standing to challenge an ordinance that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Continue Reading Wedding Business Loses First Amendment Challenge to Local Antidiscrimination Law

asset_upload_file91_2558
Virginia exercises “editorial control” over the brochures placed in kiosks located in its welcome centers, like this one in the Town of Skippers, limiting content to advertisements and other speech relevant to highway safety and the traveling public.

In a recent case involving the State of Virginia’s authority to regulate the placement of informational brochures in its welcome centers and rest areas, an advertiser brought suit. Continue Reading “Chilling Effect” Must Be Reasonable to Show Standing, plus an Expansion of the Government Speech Doctrine