Brief Fact Summary. The Petitioner, City of Erie (Petitioner), enacted an ordinance banning public nudity. The Respondent, Pap’s A.M. (Respondent), challenged the constitutionality of the ordinance, maintaining its freedom of expression (as a nude dancing establishment) was violated.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. When it is of public interest to regulate the safety and well being of citizens, a City may enact an ordinance, which has minor suppressive effects on some, for the greater good of the whole.
But simply to define what is being banned as the message is to assume the conclusion.View Full Point of Law
Issue. This case considers whether a city ordinance, facially designed to protect the public from the secondary effects of public nudity (prostitution, etc