Document: 479 U.S. 92 107 S.Ct. 383 93 L.Ed.2d 334 CITY OF NEWPORT, KENTUCKY, et al.v.Nicholas A. IACOBUCCI, dba Talk of the Town, al. No. 86-139. Nov. 17, 1986. Rehearing Denied Jan. 12, 1987. See 1047, 913. Order on remand, 812 F.2d 294. PER CURIAM. 1 In 1982, City Commission Newport, Ky., enacted Ordinance 0-82-85. This ordinance prohibited nude or nearly dancing in local establishments licensed to sell liquor for consumption premises.1 A state law imposing an almost identical prohibition was upheld by this Court New York State Liquor Authority v. Bellanca, 452 714, 101 2599, 69 357 (1981) (per curiam ), as being within State's broad power under Twenty-first Amendment2 regulate sale its boundaries. 2 Respondents, proprietors Newport that offered entertainment, challenged federal court. They contended deprived them their rights First and Fourteenth Amendments, they sought declaratory injunctive relief 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against enforcement.3 The District ruled constitutional, stating it "is squarely doctrine Bellanca . must be basis." App. Pet. Cert. 50a. 3 divided panel United States Appeals Sixth Circuit reversed judgment. 785 1354 (1986). It found decision inapplicable because Kentucky voters, rather than city Commonwealth, determine whether alcohol may sold. Pursuant authority granted Commonwealth's Constitution,4 expressly authorizes a conduct popular election question when specified proportion qualified voters petition such election. Ky.Rev.Stat. §§ 242.010-242.990 (1981 Supp.1986). Noting Court's statement "[t]he ban alcoholic beverages entirely includes lesser premises where topless occurs," U.S., at 717, S.Ct., 2601, Appeals' majority nevertheless concluded could not justified bestowed Amendment. stated case does fall "doctrine" "rationale" "cannot exercise part hold full." F.2d, 1358. court remanded determination, among other things, city's enact police power. dissenting judge argued read too narrowly, he is restricted solely industry. 4 We agree with dissent's conclusion controlled we therefore reverse. reach Amendment certainly without limit,5 but previous decisions have established that, context licensing, confers regulatory powers States. 5 "While States, vested are general power, require no specific grant Federal Constitution legislate respect matters traditionally scope sweep has been recognized conferring something more normal over public health, welfare, morals." California LaRue, 409 109, 114, 390, 395, 34 342 (1972). 6 license control program. "In LaRue liquor, conferred Amendment, outweighed any interest program." Doran Salem Inn, Inc., 422 922, 932-933, 95 2561, 2568, 45 648 (1975). statute just ban. 7 misperceived base ruling seized upon single sentence, characterizing Bellanca. Because cannot approval, similarly bars. holding "has times, places, circumstances which sold," 715, 2600, never attached constitutional significance division alcohol. given generally delegate see fit.6 8 There requirement same governmental unit licenses, revoke Indeed, while provides decided election, parties agreement finding violation law, regulation, ordinance. Brief Opposition 7. Yet, rationale opinion implies Constitution, neither nor Only strained reading would each licensing made plebiscite. Moreover, there statutory provision gives direct authority, once permitted, manner regulation. Thus, if respondents were prevail argument only can nudity alcohol, possible bars immune from 9 Commission, preamble ordinance, determined serving "injurious citizens" city. necessary range purposes, including "prevent[ing] blight deterioration City's neighborhoods" "decreas[ing] incidence crime, disorderly juvenile delinquency." 1360. "Given added presumption favor validity regulation area requires," 118-119, 397, plain maintaining order outweighs free expression nude. fact Commonwealth delegated one portion electorate decide served establishments—does differentiate 10 certiorari granted, judgment reversed, further proceedings consistent opinion. 11 Justice SCALIA writ set cause oral argument. 12 so ordered. 13 MARSHALL dissents summary disposition, ordered affording prior notice opportunity file briefs merits. See, e.g., Acosta Louisiana Dept. Health Human Resources, 478 251, 106 2876, 192 (1986) (MARSHALL, J., dissenting). 14 STEVENS, whom BRENNAN joins, dissenting. 15 As I previously written, reasoning per disposition (1981), "blatantly incorrect." Id., 725, 2605 (STEVENS, Neither language fair construction purpose lends support shields restrictions speech full review. Without repeating what said opinion, believe important highlight some fundamental defects analysis. 16 At time, long ago, considered elementary merely created exception operation Commerce Clause. Craig Boren, 429 190, 206, 97 451, 461, 50 397 (1976). explained shortly after Amendment's passage, "sanctions right concerning intoxicating liquors brought without, unfettered Clause." Ziffrin, Inc. Reeves, 308 132, 138, 60 163, 166, 84 L.Ed. 128 (1939); also Board Equalization Young's Market Co., 299 59, 57 77, 81 38 (1936). 17 flatly rejected basis sustaining otherwise violated Equal Protection pointed out "[a]s commentator remarked: 'Neither text history suggests qualifies individual protected Bill Rights use concerned.' " 461 (quoting P. Brest, Processes Constitutional Decisionmaking, Cases Materials 258 (1975)); Larkin Grendel's Den, 459 116, 122, n. 5, 103 505, 509, 74 297 (1982); Moose Lodge Irvis, 407 178-179, 1965, 1974, 32 627 (1972); Wisconsin Constantineau, 400 433, 436, 91 507, 27 515 (1971). 18 recent years, however, completely distorted now barely discernible effect Clause cases, see, Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. Authority, 476 573, 2080, 90 552 (1986); Bacchus Imports, Ltd. Dias, 468 263, 279, 104 3049, 3060, 82 200 (1984), but, today, dispositive cases. paradox overstated: thought prepared recognize bite intervening demonstrate, toothless except freedom involved.1 19 Were internal inconsistency interpreting problem analysis, still enough call these into question. But far severe dangerous that. duty "assess substantiality interests asserted [and] those means less intrusive activity Amendment." Schad Mount Ephraim, 61, 70, 2176, 2183, 68 671 (1981). Shirking responsibility, instead relies exclusively sustain assumes, arguendo, violate Through concludes municipal ordinances statutes regulating business equally facial challenges predicated Amendment.2 Unlike (1972), need consider evidence supporting justification ordinance;3 articulation legitimate sufficient. words student commentator, "one inquire why [chooses] go extremes avoid first amendment analysis." Recent Developments—Constitutional Law, Vill.L.Rev. 177, 185 (1973). 20 dimensions ignores. To begin with, limited dancing, "gross sexuality," barrooms.4 On contrary, applies every establishment requires license, and, even then, dancing.5 extends host ordinary 243.020(3) For example, theater champagne during intermission license. surely strange suggest dramatic production like "Hair" lose protection might lobby intermission.6 CALIFORNIA 121, 398 (Douglas, 21 Perhaps disavow apply performers play "Hair," "Romeo Juliet" containing scene violates Newport's Southeastern Promotions, Conrad, 420 546, 1239, 43 448 disavowal would, submit, confirm my view really bearing whatsoever Amendment—whether dancer, actor, unpopular customer.7 22 Similarly, attention focused specter unregulated nudity, particularly sexually suggestive dancing. integrity embrace forms expressive attire offensive majority, perhaps likely stimulate violent reactions, ordinarily entitled protection.8 sold athletic stadium, hotel, restaurant, sidewalk cafe According restriction speech—be content based neutral—in places enjoys validity. indeed Paul Robert Cohen had wear his vulgar jacket courtroom, sent jail wearing Yankee Stadium. California, 403 15, 1780, 29 284 23 Given concerns, concur yet another short shrift issues, benefit briefing should applied, much extended,9 taking cognizance areas. continue quite wrong proceeding repealed Eighteenth undefined well. 24 respectfully dissent. 0-82-85, II, provides: "It shall unlawful person guilty performing appears establishment's expose pubic area, anus, vulva genitals, simulation thereof, female breast referred areola, nipple, thereof." Sections IV V specify criminal civil penalties proprietor who knowingly permits proscribed occupational revoked. 0-82-85 forth entirety appendix 1354, 1360-1362 (CA6 1986). relevant part: "The transportation importation State, Territory, possession delivery therein liquors, laws hereby prohibited." Respondents second 1362-1363, requiring employees drink register Police Department fingerprinted. constitutionality valid implementation 1355-1358. That issue here. General Assembly shall, provide whereby sense people county, city, town, district precinct taken, spirituous, vinous malt sold, bartered loaned therein, thereof regulated. nothing herein construed interfere repeal force relating gift liquors. All elections held day regular days." 120, n., 398, (1972) (Stewart, concurring): "This say empowers act total irrationality invidious discrimination controlling distribution dispensation borders. And most assuredly necessarily overrides allotted Constitution. 433 [91 (1971) ]; Hostetter Idlewild Bon Voyage Corp., 377 324, 329-334 [84 1293, 1296-1299, 350 (1964) Revenue James Beam 341 1247, 362 ]." inapplicable, did state-law delegation Newport. express issue. fails explain how treatment discussion lack Nor mention post-Bellanca unequivocally notion "exercise way impinges Establishment (1982). absolutely Larkin. These vastly different effects attributed reflecting difference value placed speech, Clause, Valley Forge Christian College Americans Separation Church 454 464, 102 752, 70 700 (1982), firmly declared "principled create hierarchy values." 484, 765. stating, declined afford special respect. Yet reject proposition all values equivalent, actually low end sliding scale. course, dealt statute, municipality's distinction between subparts areas law. Community Communications Co. Boulder, 455 40, 48-52, 835, 839-841, 810 (1982) (antitrust immunity "state action"); Illinois Milwaukee, 406 91, 93-98, 1385, 1387-1390, 31 712 (Supreme original jurisdiction); Lincoln County Luning, 133 529, 363, 33 766 (1890) (Eleventh Amendment). Of areas, municipality equated State. Waller Florida, 387, 1184, 25 435 (1970) (double jeopardy); Avery Midland County, 390 474, 480, 88 1114, 1118, (1968) (Fourteenth cases demonstrate "particular factual legal important" determining state-municipality relevant. Lafayette Power & Light 389, 430, 7, 98 1123, 1145, 55 364 (1978) Today, time history, holds municipalities. Until now, twice faced involving reserved passing both 509; 933, merits not, view, merit reversal. California's Alcoholic Beverage Control hearings problems become associated Witnesses included representatives enforcement agencies, counsel, owners premises, investigators. 111, 393. demonstrated wide illegal conduct, prostitution, indecent exposure young girls, rapes, assault officers, place around establishments. Ibid. uphold thus grounded "the [the Department] cited Court." 115, 395. 69-73, 2183-2185, (refusing infringement present actual purported justifications statute). stands striking contrast; "no substantive government's presented" Court. 1359 barrooms valid. suggested 723, 10, 2604, barroom appropriate forum type entertainment since patrons know expect enter leave disapprove hear. Cf. Splawn 431 595, 604, 1987, 1992, 52 606 (1977) dissenting) (bookstore's advertisement provocative material put uninterested passersby notice). wholly unlike keeping pigs parlor. FCC Pacifica Foundation, 438 726, 750, 3026, 3040, 1073 (1978). keep secluded barnyards, do offend sensibilities public. makes crime appear "in consolation bar owner retain foregoes run same. 136-137, Even years ago "too late doubt liberties religion infringed denial placing conditions privilege." Sherbert Verner, 374 404, 83 1790, 1794, 965 (1963); Van Alstyne, Demise Right-Privilege Distinction Harv.L.Rev. 1439 (1968). One anomalies approach presumably subject scrutiny produced Since deals "transportation into" selling bourbon. case, apply. Notwithstanding pronouncements omnipotence hope "be difficult prohibiting political discussions drink, though record show, conclusively, often lead behavior, assaults homicide." N.Y.2d 524, 531, N.Y.S.2d 616, 619, N.E.2d 460, (1980). 2, supra.

Category: 2