Question

With the objectives of pre-venting crime, maintaining property values, and preserving the quality of urban life, New York City enacted an ordi-nance to regulate the locations of commercial establishments that featured adult entertainment. The ordinance expressly applied to female, but not male, topless entertainment. Adele Buzzetti owned the Cozy Cabin, a New York City cabaret that featured female topless dancers. Buzzetti and an anonymous dancer filed a suit in a federal district court against the city, asking the court to block the enforcement of the ordinance. The plaintiffs argued, in part, that the ordinance violated the equal protection clause. Under the equal protection clause, what standard should the court apply in considering this ordinance? Under this test, how should the court rule? Why?

Answer 1

Under the equal protection clause, the court should apply the intermediate scrutiny test in considering this ordinance. The court should rule that the ordinance violates the equal protection clause, as it does not meet the requirements of the intermediate scrutiny test.

Step-by-step explanation:

Under the equal protection clause, the court should apply the intermediate scrutiny test in considering this ordinance. This test requires that the government's classification serve important governmental objectives and that the means chosen be substantially related to achieving those objectives. In this case, the objectives of preventing crime, maintaining property values, and preserving the quality of urban life can be seen as important governmental objectives. However, the ordinance's differential treatment of female and male topless entertainment raises concerns about gender discrimination. The court should rule that the ordinance violates the equal protection clause, as it does not meet the requirements of the intermediate scrutiny test.

Answer 2

The answer is: the Court should block the application of this city ordinance due to discrimination against businesses with topless female dancers.

Step-by-step explanation:

The Equal Protection Clause (Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment) states the following:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

This is commonly known as Equal Justice Under the Law, which means both men and women have to be treated equally by all laws and ordinances in every government level.

In this specific case the city ordinance only regulates businesses with topless female dancers but it doesn´t regulate businesses with topless male dancers. In order for the city ordinance to comply with the Fourteenth Amendment it must regulate all businesses with topless dancers without regards on whether male or female dancers perform on the shows.