Court Cases Flashcards
1
Q
Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc
A
- Adult cinemas can be treated differently than normal theatres, as it doesn’t limit speech
2
Q
Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego
A
- Cities can regulate billboards. Commercial outdoor advertising can’t be treated harsher than non-commercial
3
Q
LA City Council v. Taxpayers of Vincent
A
- Municipalities can regulate the posting of political messaging and signs on public property. Incidental limits on speech are okay so long as it has a neutral narrowly tailored purpose.
4
Q
Renton v. Playtime Theatres
A
- You can regulate adult theatres operate, so long as it is content neutral
5
Q
Ladue v. Gilleo
A
- Can’t regulate signs on private property, can’t foreclose an entire form of media.
6
Q
Reed v. Gilbert
A
- Can’t regulate religious signs differently than others.
7
Q
Berman v Parker
A
- Private property could be taken for a public purpose with just compensation.
8
Q
Nollan v. California Coastal Commission
A
- There must be an essential nexus between the conditions of the permit and the issue at hand
9
Q
Dolan v. Tigard
A
- The burden on the property owner must be proportional to the public benefit
10
Q
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
A
- Physical takings are not the same as regulatory takings, and regulatory talkings do not require compensation. Temporary moratoriums on development do not remove the entire economic value
11
Q
Kelo v. New London
A
- Eminent domain maybe be used to transfer land to another private owner to facilitate economic development, and this is not a taking.
