Judge upholds law for Ohio strip clubs

yndy
Maryland
Judge upholds law for Ohio strip clubs

Adult entertainment owners, trade group fail to get state's 'no-touch' rule declared unconstitutional

By Phil Trexler
Beacon Journal staff writer

Published on Tuesday, Jun 23, 2009

A federal judge has upheld Ohio's ''no-touch'' law for strip clubs in Akron and around the state.

A group of adult entertainment owners and the Buckeye Association of Club Executives, a not-for-profit trade group that represents cabarets and adult bookstores, had sued in U.S. District Court seeking to have the state's no-touch law declared unconstitutional.

Akron was among several cities and counties named as defendants in the lawsuit filed in October 2007. The suit came in reaction to new state laws covering exotic dance clubs and adult bookstores.

Judge Solomon Oliver Jr., in a 45-page decision released Monday, granted motions by local government attorneys to have the suit dismissed.

A message left with Berkman, Gordon, Murray & DeVan, a Cleveland law firm representing the adult entertainment groups, was not returned.

Oliver found that the state law that bans exotic dancers and customers from touching each other does not violate First Amendment or other constitutional rights of the business owners.

The judge also upheld the state law that limits the hours of operation for adult clubs that serve liquor.

Oliver disagreed with claims from club owners that the ''no touch'' law violated freedom of speech guarantees.

He also disagreed with arguments that the ban is overly broad and could be applied to ballet dancers or other mainstream theatrical performers.

''Indeed, there is no evidence before the court that musicals such as Hair are characterized by an emphasis on specified sexual activities or anatomical areas,'' the judge wrote in his decision.

Phil Trexler can be reached at 330-996-3717 or [email protected].

A federal judge has upheld Ohio's ''no-touch'' law for strip clubs in Akron and around the state.

A group of adult entertainment owners and the Buckeye Association of Club Executives, a not-for-profit trade group that represents cabarets and adult bookstores, had sued in U.S. District Court seeking to have the state's no-touch law declared unconstitutional.

Akron was among several cities and counties named as defendants in the lawsuit filed in October 2007. The suit came in reaction to new state laws covering exotic dance clubs and adult bookstores.

Judge Solomon Oliver Jr., in a 45-page decision released Monday, granted motions by local government attorneys to have the suit dismissed.

A message left with Berkman, Gordon, Murray & DeVan, a Cleveland law firm representing the adult entertainment groups, was not returned.

Oliver found that the state law that bans exotic dancers and customers from touching each other does not violate First Amendment or other constitutional rights of the business owners.

The judge also upheld the state law that limits the hours of operation for adult clubs that serve liquor.

Oliver disagreed with claims from club owners that the ''no touch'' law violated freedom of speech guarantees.

He also disagreed with arguments that the ban is overly broad and could be applied to ballet dancers or other mainstream theatrical performers.

''Indeed, there is no evidence before the court that musicals such as Hair are characterized by an emphasis on specified sexual activities or anatomical areas,'' the judge wrote in his decision.

Phil Trexler can be reached at 330-996-3717 or [email protected].

2 comments

Latest

samsung1
15 years ago
interesting...
maybe the clubs will start to lower the price of 'lap' dances because of this (I doubt it though, wishful thinking!)
gk
15 years ago
This is why out of state visitors wonder about the inconsistencies at Ohio strip clubs. The law intimidates many club owners, dancers and customers. Since Ohio's smoking ban, SC patronage dropped significantly. With the passage of the new SC law a while back, there was another big drop-off in patronage--only serious clubbers seem to be be coming out and occassional party gawkers. A few customers trickled back in once the appeals started. While the old laws were hardly enforced, dependending on city and region of the state, the new law is written differently and brings personal jeoepardy to both the dancer and potentially the customer. While the bigger cities may choose not to bother too much with it, some of the close-in suburbs are taking it more seriously and using it as a means to intimidate some clubs into closing, meaning they periodically schedule clandestine observations, then return with undercover cops/agents or whatever and issue citations. These have been issued to dancers only from what I have seen. I know several dancers who have received them and one who has received two of them.

While enforcement and interpretation does vary, one common result seems prevalent, things seem to button up more at midnight--literally.

You can still have fun, but it's something we all have to watch. Basically it's an attack on our personal liberties which I expect will go all the way to the supreme court. It was brought on by some right wing religious nut who went overboard at SCs and ruined his marriange and life, so his sel-imposed pennance is ruining it for everybody else. Our Goveernor should have vetoed this law, but he played for the nut votes dnd didn't--end he's a Democrat! Convention business is hurting in Ohio, businesses are even leaving the state. Maybe because it's we've become such an Puritan zone here.

(Hey Samsung, in Cle the local LF Hustler Club did lower it's exhorbitant pricing because of the downturn ,before it closed. It may re-open in a new building (part of an eminent domain settlement), but we'll see if the economy makes them hesitate.)

Stay tuned. We will persevere!
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion