§Why CasetextPricing

For the People Theatres of N.Y. Inc.,, Plaintiff, JGJ Merchandise Corp.,, Respondent,v.City of New York, et al., Appellants.---------------------------------Ten's Cabaret, Inc.,, et al., Respondents, v. City of New York, et al., Appellants.

Brief

48 Cited authorities

  1. Ward v. Rock Against Racism

    491 U.S. 781 (1989)   Cited 2,862 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that music is protected expression

  2. Payne v. Tennessee

    501 U.S. 808 (1991)   Cited 2,611 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that admission of victim impact evidence at death penalty sentencing phase does not per se violate the Eighth Amendment

  3. New York v. Ferber

    458 U.S. 747 (1982)   Cited 1,995 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding child pornography is not subject to First Amendment protections

  4. Marks v. United States

    430 U.S. 188 (1977)   Cited 2,097 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that due process is violated if the trial court instructs the jury based on the current interpretation of a statute, rather than the interpretation that controlled at the time of the allegedly criminal acts

  5. Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.

    475 U.S. 41 (1986)   Cited 1,425 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that local governments may enact zoning ordinances against adult movie theaters to curb negative "secondary effects"

  6. United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.

    529 U.S. 803 (2000)   Cited 820 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute was content based because it “applies only to channels primarily dedicated to sexually explicit adult programming or other programming that is indecent”

  7. Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.

    564 U.S. 552 (2011)   Cited 506 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on "speech result[ing] from an economic motive" is not "a mere commercial regulation"

  8. Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley

    408 U.S. 92 (1972)   Cited 1,333 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding a law was content-based where it prohibited nonlabor-related picketing at a place of employment

  9. City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc.

    535 U.S. 425 (2002)   Cited 411 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "'[t]he First Amendment does not require a city, before enacting . . . an [adult entertainment secondary effects] ordinance to conduct new studies or produce evidence independent of that already generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to the problem that the city addresses.'"

  10. Thomas v. Chicago Park Dist

    534 U.S. 316 (2002)   Cited 411 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a city ordinance requiring all individuals to obtain a permit before conducting an event with more than 50 persons was a content-neutral time, place, and manner regulation of a public forum because officials were not authorized to consider or pass on the content of speech and the grounds for the denial of a permit had nothing to do with what a speaker might say