Nightclub operators challenged Wickliffe, Ohio’s nightclub ordinance, which required permits for the operation of for-profit nightclubs, defined by the ordinance as places “to engage in social activities such as dancing; the enjoyment of live or prerecorded music; the serving of food and beverages; all of which are provided for a consideration that may be included in a cover charge or included in the price of the food and beverage.” The nightclub operators claimed that the ordinance limited the right to assembly. The court held that the permitting of businesses is not a regulation of expression or assembly, even though some First Amendment-protected activity might be implicated in an attenuated manner. The court also found that the permitting requirement was not overbroad because it did not reach a substantial amount of protected expression or other protected conduct.
Miller v. City of Wickliffe, No. 1:12-CV1248, slip op., 2015 WL 9304665 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 21, 2015)