|
City of Erie v. Pap’s
A.M., 529 U.S. 277 (2000)
Author: Sam Biers
Facts: Erotic dancers were
no longer allowed to dance nude, they must wear a minimum of pasties and
G-String after the City passed an ordinance banning public nudity when a person
knowingly or intentionally appears in public nude.
Issue(s): Whether the
nudity ordinance is content neutral regulation or whether it impacts expressive
conduct?
Holding: The ordinance on
its fact is content-neutral restriction on conduct, b/c it is aimed at the
secondary criminal effect of that conduct, thus it is N/T’d to protect the
city’s interest decreasing associative criminal activity.
Procedure: Pap’s challenged
City ordinance banning nude dancing sought Injunction and Declaratory relief.
Penn. Sup. Ct held granted injunction and held the ordinance violated
Respondent’s freedom of expression b/c it was content based–suppress erotic
message of nudity. U.S.S.Ct. Reversed.
Rule(s): 1st
Rationale: Barnes
Indiana’s ban on nudity did not violate 1st Amend, but without a
clear majority.
Ordinance here regulates
conduct alone. It does not target nudity that contains an erotic message; but
it bans all public nudity regardless of expressive elements.
GI = reduce crime that
accompanies nude establishments–combating crime. Studies proof increase.
Criminal activity is not related to expressive conduct and the ordinance does
not attempt to regulate the erotic message of nudity.
The ban on public nudity is
not different from ban on burning draft cards in O’Brien. Here, the ban
is not a complete ban on expression. The state’s Int in preventing harmful
secondary effects is not related to suppression of expression. Even if the
ordinance has some effect on the erotic message, dancers are free to perform
wearing pasties and G-Strings, thus any effect is minimal.
Law is valid if it passes
the O’Brien (4) Factor Test: 1) Rbl Govt Int must exist; 2) Regulation
must further the GI (not eliminate the secondary effects); 3) Any incidental
speech restriction must be no greater than necessary to further GI; and 4)
address whether any alternative means of addressing the problem exist.
DISSENT: Secondary effects
has only been used to regulate location, Majority agrees that pasties and
G-Strings will not greatly reduce secondary effects. Evid that City had an
ordinance regulating the location, without enforcement, and therefore the nudity
ordinance is not “no greater than necessary.” No matter how the ordinance is
applied the result is a total ban.
Pl’s A: Ordinance violates
freedom of expression–state of nudity in dance.
|