ILNews

7th Circuit upholds injunction in adult-business ordinance case

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a Southern District of Indiana judge who granted a preliminary injunction preventing Indianapolis from enforcing the 2002 ordinance that regulates adult-bookstore business hours.

After hearing arguments Sept. 20 in Annex Books, Inc., et al. v. City of Indianapolis, Ind., No. 09-4156, the federal appellate court issued a per curium opinion today upholding U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker’s preliminary injunction. Judge Barker heard the case on remand from the 7th Circuit after the appellate court concluded the city of Indianapolis needed evidence about the effects of the law it enacted that required adult bookstores to be closed certain hours of the day.

At a hearing before the District Court, Indianapolis offered one piece of evidence: a study that said dispersing adult stores that sell items for off-site reading or viewing reduced crime in Sioux City, Iowa. But this article didn’t support Indianapolis’ position because it deals with dispersal instead of an hour-of-operation ordinance. The study also didn’t attempt to control for other variables.

The adult bookstores offered the arrest data from Indianapolis near its stores that showed the number of arrests didn’t decrease once the ordinance took effect. These numbers weren't subjected to statistical analysis, but the Circuit judges found they imply that the change in business hours didn’t produce any measurable benefit.

The Circuit judges also suggested the parties devote their energies to compiling information from which a reliable final decision may be made following a trial on the merits.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT