Opinion ID: 603788
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Serious Questions of Law

Text: 50 Next, we turn to the question of whether the district court erred in concluding that this case presents serious questions of law. The City argues that the district court erred because the ordinance is constitutional on its face and plaintiffs have failed to present evidence to raise any serious doubt to the contrary. We disagree. We have already concluded that the record indicates that the City may not have provided the Adult Businesses with reasonable alternative avenues of expression. This is a constitutional question which by definition is a fair ground for litigation. Adultworld Bookstore, 758 F.2d at 1351. Moreover, this circuit considers zoning ordinance cases such as this to present complex constitutional problems. Id. In this particular instance, the presumption of complexity is justified given that the answer to the question of what constitutes a reasonable opportunity to open and operate an adult business is not free from ambiguity.