MINNEAPOLIS, MN -- U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis recently issued a preliminary injunction against the city here in a case brought by the 22nd Avenue Station, an exotic dance club also known as the Double Deuce. The challenge came after the city attempted to close the club based on a 2002 amendment to the city’s adult ordinance. The city Planning Commission, in drafting the amendment, had relied on studies touting the "adverse secondary effects" adult establishments allegedly have on neighborhoods, a reliance which has been successful for such ordinances in past decades. However, in the same year as the amendments were passed, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books (2002) that governments could not rely on shoddy data or reasoning and that their evidence for secondary effects must fairly support the rationale for an ordinance. Anti-adult entertainment factions are only now slowly catching on to this new standard. (See X-Press report, “Victory in Secondary Effects Trial,” 1/27/06)

In the case of the Double Deuce, a secondary effects study done by urban planner R. Bruce McLaughlin calls the city’s rationale for the ordinance into serious question. The Double Deuce averaged significantly fewer calls for police service over a three-year period than two neighboring bars, a nearby liquor store, and even one nearby residence. McLaughlin also found no discernible effects on property valuation related to the presence of the club.

In his ruling, Judge Davis noted that the city failed to provide any meaningful rebuttal to McLaughlin's findings. And "although the City was not required to conduct its own empirical studies before passing the 2002 ordinance," Davis wrote, "it cannot rely on shoddy, irrelevant studies to justify its passage."

"The notion that adult entertainment causes crime is a lie," said Randall Tigue, an attorney for the Double Deuce. "The secondary effects are just myths.”

Information and quotes from Mike Mosedale, Minneapolis/St. Paul City Pages, 5/24/06

LAWRENCE V. TEXAS CITED IN POLY CASE

SALT LAKE CITY, UT -- The privacy rights outlined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) -- of considerable interest to the adult entertainment industry because many hold that the right to obtain and enjoy adult materials is implied in that decision -- were recently cited in a dissent by Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine M. Durham in Utah v. Rodney Hans Holm, a case involving Holm’s conviction for bigamy and sexual conduct with a minor. Holm was convicted of bigamy not because he married several wives in legal civil marriages, but because of his multiple religious-ceremony marriages in which he “purported to marry” his “wives.” The court majority ruled that the bigamy and sex with a minor statutes were constitutional under such conditions and upheld his convictions.

Chief Justice Durham concurred as to the sex with a minor conviction but dissented from the rest of the decision. Citing Lawrence, she questioned whether the state can constitutionally criminalize private, religiously-motivated, consensual relationships between adults

“The majority upholds Holm’s criminal bigamy conviction based solely on his participation in a private religious ceremony because the form of that ceremony -- though not its intent -- resembled what we think of as a wedding…. [This] ignores the legislature’s intent that the concept of marriage in Utah law be confined to a legally recognized union,” said Chief Justice Durham.

Information drawn from Art Leonard, New York Law School, 5/18/06
Thanks to Woodhull Foundation for the news alert.

BUST FOR DVDS FEATURING (GASP!) SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

BRAZORIA, TEXAS -- Convenience store owner Sandipkumar Ghandi, after being arrested on a misdemeanor assault charge when a female employee woman filed a complaint against him for unwanted sexual conduct, ended up being additionally charged with a felony when police identified allegedly obscene DVDs for sale at the store. Brazoria County District Attorney Jeri Yenne claims the DVDs clearly violate the Texas Penal Code on obscenity, which states (according to Yenne) that people cannot wholesale pornographic material that includes any type of sexual intercourse.

Information is drawn from Bridget Brown, The Facts, 5/23/06
See Michael Hayes, XBIZ.com, 5/24/06 for comments by First Amendment Attorney Lawrence Walters

XXX PROPONENTS FIGHT ICANN DECISION

MARINA DEL RAY, CA -- Stuart Lawley, president of ICM Registry -- which is the company that advanced the proposal to The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) for a .XXX Sponsored Top Level Domain (TLD) for adult entertainment online -- has refused to accept ICANN’s recent vote rejecting the scheme. The ICANN Board of Directors recently voted 9-5 against the TLD after having voted to approve it earlier. Lawley has filed an appeal of the decision and has also made public a series of emails which allegedly show that the U.S. government pressured ICANN into voting against the TLD. Among other things, the emails allegedly show that White House operative Karl Rove met with James Dobson, the right-wing leader of Focus On The Family, and that a secret “Stop .XXX” went in effect shortly after the meeting.

If the accusations of political pressure are true, such actions would constitute a violation of understandings concerning the supposed independence of ICANN from government control.

"The documents released so far reveal that the United States government exerted undue political influence on ICANN's consideration of the .xxx domain application, and treated an independent corporation as a client agency of the United States government despite a lack of any legitimate authority to do so," said Lawley.

In an additional development, ICM Registry claims that the government emails, which were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, had been redacted. Lawley has filed suit against the government to obtain the uncensored versions.

ICANN chief executive Paul Twomey denies that the vote to reject the .XXX plan was politically motivated or unduly influenced by the U.S. government. He says that the vote was based only on whether ICANN board members believed ICM Registry could live up to contract language. ICM Registry was agreeing to comply with all relevant international laws on X-rated content, an obviously unrealistic promise.

"It became clear that if we approved this, ICANN would end up being the world's censor," said Twomey.

Some information is drawn from Victoria Shannon, International Herald News, 5/21/06
See also: Ben Charny, eWeek, 5/22/06
See also: Kevin Murphy, Computer Business Review, 5/19/06