Court Opinion

ID: 9413500
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-01 23:11:58.850058+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:46:11.351120
License: Public Domain

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the majority opinion in this case with two additional observations. First, one must step back in wonder occasionally and ask, as to some areas of law, what have judges wrought? It makes little practical sense to say that the Fare West has to relocate if it permits certain forms of adult entertainment but not if, clothing its “dancers” with minuscule additional amounts of tape, it advertises — truthfully—that the entertainment has not changed. This is a silly consequence of first amendment jurisprudence that results from categorizing “zoning” regulations differently from “content-based” advertising regulations.
Second, the City of Dallas could have avoided this adverse ruling if it had adopted regulations such as that for “simple signs,” SDJ, Inc. v. City of Houston, 837 F.2d 1268, 1278 (5th Cir.1988), or that upheld in In re Town of Islip v. Caviglia, 73 N.Y.2d 544, 540 N.E.2d 215, 542 N.Y.S.2d 139 (1989).