The Test: As the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida describes it, the plaintiffs’ “constitutional challenge focuses solely on the third part of the Renton test and the second part of the O’Brien test. The two inquiries, whether the ordinance ‘is designed to serve’ a substantial government interest (Renton) and whether the ordinance ‘furthers’ a substantial government interest (O’Brien), are ‘virtually indistinguishable.’” (citation omitted).
The Result:
Plaintiffs have not demonstrated that the County’s reliance on evidence related to businesses other than adult dancing establishments was unreasonable or that this evidence is inapplicable to adult dancing establishments.
Plaintiffs have failed to cast direct doubt on the County’s rationale for enacting Ordinance 05-21. Plaintiffs did not address all of the evidence supporting the County’s finding of a correlation between sexual oriented businesses and prostitution, the potential spread of disease, lewdness, public indecency, illicit sexual activity, illicit drug use and drug trafficking, undesirable and criminal behavior associated with alcohol consumption, and litter. Nor did Plaintiffs furnish evidence sufficient to call into question each of these factual findings. Plaintiffs have therefore failed to satisfy their burden of casting direct doubt on the County’s rationale for the ordinance.
Here is the decision. I’m betting an appeal is in the works.
Cary Wiggins on the Web