Laserfiche WebLink
,I • <br /> 1 A. Supreme Court Decisions <br /> • <br /> The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the validity of municipal adult entertainm <br /> zoning regulations in Young v. American Mini Theaters. Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 96 S.Ct. 2, <br /> (1976), and City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 106 S.Ct. 926 (198t <br /> In Young, the Court upheld the validity of Detroit ordinances prohibiting t <br /> operation of theaters showing sexually explicit "adult movies" within 1,000 feet of <br /> 1 two other adult establishments.9/ The ordinances authorized a waiver of the 1,0004 <br /> restriction if a proposed use would not be contrary to the public interest and/or oft <br /> factors were satisfied. Young, supra, 427 U.S. at 54 n.7, 96 S.Ct. at 2444 n.7. T <br /> • ordinances were supported by urban planners and real estate experts who testified tf <br /> concentration of adult-type establishments "tends to attract an undesirable quan: <br /> and quality of transients, adversely affects property values, causes an increase <br /> crime, especially prostitution, and encourages residents and businesses to mc <br /> elsewhere." Id. at 55, 96 S.Ct. at 2445. A "myriad" of locations were left available. <br /> adult.establishments outside the forbidden 1,000-foot distance zone, and no existi, <br /> establishments were affected. Id. at 71 n.35, 96 S.Ct. at 2453 n.35. <br /> i • <br /> - <br /> Writing for a plurality of four, Justice Stevens upheld the zoning ordinance as <br /> reasonable regulation of the place where adult films may be shown because (1) the <br /> was a factual basis for the city's conclusion that the ordinance would prevent blight; <br /> the ordinance was directed at preventing "secondary effects" of adult-establishme <br /> concentration rather than protecting citizens from unwanted "offensive" speech; (3) tt <br /> ordinance did not greatly restrict access to lawful speech, and (4) "the city must <br /> allowed a reasonable opportunity to experiment with solutions to admittedly seric, <br /> problems." Id. at 63 n.18, 71 nn.34, 35, 96 S. Ct. at 2448-49 n.18, 2452-53 nn.34, 35. <br /> 8/ The only reported Minnesota court case reviewing an adult entertainment zcnir <br /> ordinance is City of St. Paul v. Carlone, 419 N.W.2d 129 (Minn. Ct. App. 198, <br /> (upholding facial constitutionality of St. Paul ordinance). <br /> 9/ The ordinances also prohibited the location of an adult theaters within 500 feet of <br /> residential area, but this provision was invalidated by the district court, and the <br /> decision was not appealed. Young v. American Mini Theaters. Inc., 427 U.S. 50, <br /> n.2, 96 S.Ct. 2440, 2444 n.2 (1976). <br /> 1 <br /> -31- <br />