Monday, April 11, 2016

Supreme Court Upholds Indy Smoking Ban Ordinance Exempting Off-Track Betting Parlor

Two years ago, the Indiana Supreme Court in a 3-2 decision held that an Evansville smoking ban ordinance that exempted the city's sole riverboat casino but not other bars and restaurants unconstitutional. That decision was authored by retiring Justice Brent Dickson. Today, the Indiana Supreme Court unanimously held that Indianapolis' smoking ban ordinance that exempts the city's sole off-track betting parlor but not other bars and restaurants was not unconstitutional.

Justice Dickson's 2014 decision in Paul Steiler Enterprises v. City of Evansville:
The Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause, Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution, prohibits the "grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens." Today we hold that this clause invalidates an Evansville ordinance expanding the city's smoking ban to bars and restaurants but exempting its only riverboat casino ("the Casino").
Justice Dickson's decision today in Whistle Stop Inn v. City of Indianapolis:
We uphold Indianapolis' non-smoking ordinance ("Ordinance"), finding that it does not violate the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution. While the Ordinance provides an exemption to satellite gambling facilities but not to bars and restaurants, Article 1, Section 23 does not prohibit this disparate treatment. We affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the city.


guy77money said...

say what???? insanity rules!

Anonymous said...

Well, it IS the Indiana Supreme Court! The Court lacks total legal scholarship.

LamLawIndy said...

_Collins_ was and remains the wrong framework for Article I, Section 23 challenges. Until _Collins_ is overruled, Article 1, Section 23 will be at the mercy of those who determine the 1st prong of the _Collins_ test, be it a court, legislative body, or administrative agency: He who wins the framing game & gets his definition of "inherent characteristics" adopted, wins.

Anonymous said...

Money talks and BS usual.

Tells you a whole lot about the political selection process regarding the "Supremes".
In my opinion Mr. Steven Nation was the most ethical candidate at least twice but the politicians got what they wanted instead. Really a shame and a sham !!!!

Eric Morris said...

Good thing Roe v Wade is the settled law of the land, though.

Pete Boggs said...

Anon 6:44 is right- this is a corruption of what's supposed to be scholarship.