Opinion ID: 76258
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.

Text: 20 In Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 106 S.Ct. 925, 89 L.Ed.2d 29 (1986), the Court upheld a city's zoning ordinance that unlike the ordinance in Young attempted to regulate the location of adult movie theaters by concentrating them rather than by dispersing them. 8 Writing for the majority, Justice Rehnquist relied on Young but outlined a new analytical framework for evaluating this type of regulation. 21 The Court's analysis involved three steps. First, the Court found that since the Renton ordinance did not ban adult theaters altogether but merely regulated where they could be located, the ordinance was properly analyzed as a time, place and manner regulation. Id. at 46, 106 S.Ct. 925. Second, the Court considered whether the ordinance was content-based or content-neutral. The Court noted that content-based ordinances are presumptively invalid and subject to strict scrutiny, but found that the Renton ordinance did not fall into that category, since it aimed not at the content of the films shown at adult motion picture theaters but rather at the secondary effects of such theaters on the surrounding community. Id. at 47, 106 S.Ct. 925 (emphasis added). Third, the Court considered whether, as a content-neutral time, place and manner regulation, the ordinance was designed to serve a substantial governmental interest and allows for reasonable alternative avenues of communication, id. at 50, 106 S.Ct. 925, and found that these conditions were met. The Court rejected the Ninth Circuit's contention that the city's justifications for the ordinance were conclusory and speculative because the Renton ordinance was enacted without the benefit of studies relating to `the particular problems or needs of Renton. ' Id. Instead, the Court held that the First Amendment does not require a city, before enacting such an ordinance, to conduct new studies or produce evidence independent of that already generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to the problem that the city addresses. Id. at 51-52, 106 S.Ct. 925. 22