NJ supreme court ruling on adult stores

[revenger 473]

Read an article on NJ.com where the NJ supreme court ruled that since patrons of adult stores and such can travel to other states to enjoy their past time the state is not violating their rights.

 

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/01/supreme_court_availability_of.html

 

This will be the next ruling against us. "Since NJ gun owners can travel to free states to exercise their rights the state is not violating their constitutional rights." (I made that up but can sure see it coming.

[SpecialK 193]

Don't give them any ideas! They obviously aren't very bright in the 1st place!

[Krdshrk 3,878]

So the supreme court's ruling is to take business OUT of NJ....

 

New Jersey - so hard up on jobs, even Strippers can't find work.

[BarkNBite 15]

IMO........Seem's we're gettin' "F' d" either way.............it's NJ.

[LorenzoS 100]

Interesting, because in the recent case in federal appeals court regarding Chicago's ban on gun ranges, they ruled that a municipality CANNOT ban the excersise of a constitutionally protected right simply becuase you can go to another juristiction.

 

I'd like this to go to the Supreme Court. The idea that the US Constitution is somehow voidable based on your locality violates the entire reason for a Federal constitution.

[NicePants 58]

Man, this state just sunk to an even deeper circle of hell.

[mcbethr 42]

Whoa... I suppose they could outlaw Synagogues, because I could just travel to PA to go to Temple.

[LorenzoS 100]

I think a Supreme Court ruling that says an individual constitutional right applies everywhere in the US would be a good thing for RKBA supporters. "But our town / county / city /state is special" is horseshit.

[AnthonyG 36]

Haha I used to work at club 35,place is a dump for the most part, but they had a few good girls when I was there. I dont know where he is getting money for lawyers for this case since his business was borderline losing money at the time.

[Midwest 28]

Whoa... I suppose they could outlaw Synagogues, because I could just travel to PA to go to Temple.

 

I know the thread is about adult book stores...and I do not mean to derail it...just illustrate and respond to the comment.

 

In a recent post on THR, I used almost the same analogy with religion...I did a hypothetical paragraph on how since the second amendment and religious freedom are protected. But only one of them applies completely in all 50 states. I came up with a 'what if' scenario if states enacted laws restricting religious activities and they varied from state to state...how soon would those laws get struck down ? I compared the 1966 Sills Act with what would happen if the same could be applied to religion...

 

....."then one in theory could use a reason for a 'religious permit' as well, then why not make everyone under go a background check with three references, fingerprints, photographs, mental health check, $100 in fees, a six month wait before a person can be allowed go to a church, synagogue or mosque?

 

Call it 'the religious protection act of 2012' and see how far it goes legally...Both the second amendment and the freedom of religion is guaranteed by law. But only one of the two is really protected in all 50 states.

 

'Religious Permit'

 

To further illustrate the stupidity of it all, suppose NJ only allows worship every other weekend, and institutes a 'religious permit' system. Illinois allows church one weekend, synagogue the next weekend and worship at the mosque the next weekend after that. Maryland decides where people can worship based on their zip code. Massachusetts decides to enforce a 'religious permit' on its citizens. California decides that cities over 200,000 must cut the amount of houses of worship in half in order to use the properties for commercial purposes to raise taxes. But in Pennsylvania there are no religious restrictions or permits to attend worship.... but it is all nice, fair, "reasonable" and legal...right? "

[deadeye74 5]

I was reading the comments after the story. Obviously the posters are missing the bigger picture! Why the heck can't people see that every time a form of government takes something from us, it's another slap in the face to the CONSTITUTION which this country is founded on! AGGGGGHHHHHH!

[LorenzoS 100]

Because most people are hypocrites, whether on the left or the right. They invoke "rights" for things they like, "sensible regulation" for things they don't. Simple as that.

[KpdPipes 388]

I was reading the comments after the story. Obviously the posters are missing the bigger picture! Why the heck can't people see that every time a form of government takes something from us, it's another slap in the face to the CONSTITUTION which this country is founded on! AGGGGGHHHHHH!

 

Because most people dont have a frigging clue of what the constitution is, or what it's purpose is....un fortunately most of the people screaming that something is "Unconstitutional" don't have a clue EITHER.

[AnthonyG 36]

I was reading the comments after the story. Obviously the posters are missing the bigger picture! Why the heck can't people see that every time a form of government takes something from us, it's another slap in the face to the CONSTITUTION which this country is founded on! AGGGGGHHHHHH!

 

I agree, I think the reason government rules in these smaller situations is because there is only so much support for that current issue people dont realize they need to suppose these issues for a bigger picture and bigger cause. Out of sight, out of mind.

[avc8130 4]

This pisses me off. Why is the #1 priority in the NJ state senate to get a gay marriage bill passed when gays can just go to Iowa to live if they want to be gay and married? Seems like a giant waste of our legislature's time.

 

I really don't care about that issue either way, but it is just another example of how stupid this ruling is.

[NicePants 58]

Can this case be appealed?

[Anselmo 87]

"today, this court becomes the first in the nation to suggest that a state can geographically restrict constitutionally permissive expression within its borders by offering a neighboring state as an alternative forum."

 

One judge has it right.

[Qel Hoth 33]

Can this case be appealed?

 

Yes and no. The NJ Supreme Court ruled on it, so this case in particular is over.

 

However, if the case is modified to reflect federal law and not state law, it can be filed in Federal court, where, assuming the judges agree that adult clubs/stores/whatever fall under protected speech (which they have in the past, with some limitations), the adult industry will win, since many many circuit courts have ruled that municipalities cannot outlaw a constitutional right because it can be exercised elsewhere.

[Soju 153]

"today, this court becomes the first in the nation to suggest that a state can geographically restrict constitutionally permissive expression within its borders by offering a neighboring state as an alternative forum."

 

One judge has it right.

 

Quoting for truth. I was going to say, just read the dissenting judge's opinion.

 

As has been compared with both firearms and religion in this thread, you can compare it with absolutely anything, and the result is the same....control. It only takes small steps over time to amount to totalitarianism in the end.

[Darkmagik 2]

Might aswell ban coffee because it's toxic and should be labeled a narcotic and pencils should have a carry permit system........NJ laws will get dumber by the years pretty soon we will need breathing licenses because it's not listed in the constitution.

[Soju 153]

Might aswell ban coffee because it's toxic and should be labeled a narcotic and pencils should have a carry permit system........NJ laws will get dumber by the years pretty soon we will need breathing licenses because it's not listed in the constitution.

 

Careful. There has already been speculation on proposals to tax breathing!

[Anselmo 87]

Might aswell ban coffee because it's toxic and should be labeled a narcotic and pencils should have a carry permit system........NJ laws will get dumber by the years pretty soon we will need breathing licenses because it's not listed in the constitution.

 

Makes no difference if it's listed in the constitution or not. They can still license it.

[raz-0 1,259]

I used to wonder if our supreme court judges have even passed the bar. Now I wonder if they have even watched the news or maybe have seen an episode of Matlock. They are truly embarrassing.

[BigHayden 77]

It's funny, this case reads exactly opposite of the 7th Circuit SAF case, Ezell v. City of Chicago, which stated that a constitutionally protected right (in Ezell, it was shooting ranges, but in this case it would be free speech), cannot be restricted on the basis that you could go somewhere else to exercise it. Here's hoping this case gets appealed...

[mikelets456 78]

At what point will stupidity be illegal?

 

So they were found to be "freedom of expression" at some point in time in NJ, now they are no longer "freedom of expression". So which one is it?

[hd2000fxdl 422]

At what point will stupidity be illegal?

 

 

Stupidity should hurt!!!

[RobertJames 14]

Stupidity should hurt!!!

 

Quite often it does. DAMHIK.

[Soju 153]

At what point will stupidity be illegal?

 

 

There is about a million times greater a chance that intelligent thought will be made illegal before stupidity.

[n4p226r 105]

It's funny, this case reads exactly opposite of the 7th Circuit SAF case, Ezell v. City of Chicago, which stated that a constitutionally protected right (in Ezell, it was shooting ranges, but in this case it would be free speech), cannot be restricted on the basis that you could go somewhere else to exercise it. Here's hoping this case gets appealed...

.

 

There is no appeal unless it can somehow go federal

[KpdPipes 388]

.

 

There is no appeal unless it can somehow go federal

 

that IS the appeal..now it goes to the US district Court.