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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT