Ask the Metro Council that was in office during 1997. That body determined that any business that regularly features nudity "for observation by patrons therein" requires a sexually oriented business license.
I don't claim that it makes sense.
For those who are irony challenged, I was using this example -- political speech of apparent literary value, to which nudity is incidental -- to illustrate how the licensing ordinance bears a very tenuous relation to the purposes that the Metro Council blathered about when it enacted the ordinance seventeen years ago. The courthouse mural -- literally within sight of the entrance to the Council chamber -- is another such example.
Keep it classy, tittysprinkles.
I have been involved in contesting that silly licensing ordinance since it was first enacted in 1997, as well as representing accused persons in numerous administrative proceedings regarding licensure. There is no stronger supporter of the right to bare arms (or whatever other body parts one wishes to bare) than I.
Where does your vitriol come from? Are you Chris Ferrell, by any chance?
Does this establishment have a Sexually Oriented Business license? Do the women have permits issued by the licensing board?
For that matter, I have long contended that the Metropolitan Government itself, as operator of the Metropolitan Courthouse (with its much larger than life mural of a bare breasted woman on the west wall of the lobby), violates its own licensing ordinance by operating without an S.O.B. license.
(The licensing board was originally named the Adult-Oriented Establishment Licensing Board, but Chris Falwell, er, Ferrell, and his colleagues on the Metro Council decided to substitute a childish acronym.)
Is Mr. Bitters represented by counsel in the Beck matter?
Republicans fear high voter turnout like a slab of baloney fears the slicer.
Standing ordinarily requires that a plaintiff plead and prove an injury in fact -- distinct from that of the public in general -- for which the court is able to grant a remedy.
In the context of an ineligible candidate appearing on the ballot, courts have recognized standing of an opposing candidate and of an election commission. I am unaware of other claims of standing being recognized.
All Comments »
The SouthComm Set
Medical News Papers |
All contents © 1995-2014
City Press LLC, 210 12th Ave. S., Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of City Press LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Powered by Foundation