On the basis of equal treatment the Indiana Supreme Court has negated the City of Evansville smoking ordinance passed in 2012. The reason for striking the law down is the exception to the law that was carved out for then Casino Aztar that is currently owned and operated by Tropicana.
Evansville is still subject to a watered down statewide law that provides exceptions for bars, restaurants, and private clubs.
This is a developing story.
and that’s the way it should be, it’ll be interesting to see which bars and venues go back to smoking. As an exsmoker, I find it refreshing not to smell bad when I go out
I agree. I am ready do have some Mardi Gras food, but if the bars are smoking… No Go.
So does that mean NO SMOKING any where on the riverboat ? Because it should !
No, that means smoking can now be allowed at any bar that requires 21 and up admission at the owners option. The way it should have been anyway.
My personal opinion is tobacco and alcohol should both be illegal ,(I have abused both for over 30 yrs + ,so I know both can kill ya) I still agree with you though that if it’s legal on the boat it should be left up to the restaraunt or the bar owner to make the call
Looks like the Mayors legal team once again wasted taxpayer monies on a law suit they couldn’t win. Wonder how much Ted Ziemer and Associates where paid?
This was passed by the Previous Administration and most of the legal work was done by them.
If you are going to shoot, make sure you are aiming first.
Well duh! It’s the one part I did not like in the ordinance.
Golly darn! Looks like Missy Mosby was on the right side of political history this time around.
Yeah, that should have been the first hint.
I guess we won’t be needing that convention hotel anymore. According to this article about Indianapolis opening the door to attract more conventions with a comprehensive (as in legal) smoking ban, Evansville is out of the convention business unless they restrict smoking on the boat.
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/nov/16/indy-smoking-law-opens-doors-conventions/
Good find: Here is what World News said about it.
INDIANAPOLIS — Not so long ago, Indianapolis was passed over time and again for conventions and corporate meetings despite a massive expansion of the Indiana Convention Center and a new 1,005-room, four-star hotel, as well as a new airport terminal that was the talk of the aviation industry and a colossal, retractable-roof stadium that hosted the 2012 Super Bowl. Why? Air quality. That all changed June 1, 2012, when citywide restrictions against indoor public smoking were expanded to include bowling alleys, hotel rooms, taxi cabs and most bars. The only exemptions were tobacco shops and hookah bars.
Nice catch, TobaccoRoad. Maybe we should abandon the Convention Hotel altogether, and focus on the IU Medical School (now needed more than ever to treat all of the new lung cancer cases).
Oh PUUUUUULEASE Missy doesn’t know the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause from Santa Clause.
Missy Mosby the next Sotomayer!!! LOL
Jobs, jobs, jobs was all she could squawk.
The oridance was in constitutional trouble the minute it gave an exemption to the Casino.
Just another reason that damn boat should be set on fire and sunk to never rise again. Nothing but a trash can for peoples’ money. It’s a super regressive tax on the poor. Plus it makes our chickenscat politician’s beholden to it and its ill gotten revenues. People should have to pay for the government services they demand not have it buried in places like casino revenue.
And please don’t tell me about all the jobs it would create A LOT more jobs would be created if people would just spend it on sensible things.
We are in 95% agreement.
Agreed!
Hey Brains,
In your first sentence, both Equal Protection & Immunities and Santa are BOTH Clauses, and that commonality is enough for Missy.
….
This just goes to show that equal treatment under the law IS the law of the land.
Regardless of the constituency.
Win or lose the City Attorney Ziemer gets paid anyway. So what the hell the taxpayers shall pay the legal expenses anyway.
Wasn’t it the city council that passed the ordinance, and wasn’t Councilman Adams the driving force behind exempting the casino, or at least the apologist for the exemption? What’s Ziemer got to do with it? Shouldn’t it be the council paying their attorney to defend their unconstitutional action?
I recall that the author of the ordinance that was just struck down was Mr. Hamilton. The City Council basically made a deal with themselves and missed on their constitutionality opinion. Today the rules regarding smoking in Evansville are exactly what the state passed and nothing more. It is basically a tobacco free for all at bars and of course the boat. The real question is whether the city council of today will show some courage and pass a comprehensive smoking ban that includes the boat or if they sit on their passive butts. If they choose the sit on their butts option we can kiss the convention business good bye. That may be fine. We can save that $20 Million because we don’t need a hotel and The Centre can go back to being called The Centre.
Not exactly tobacco free for all bars. They can have all sorts of boot-outs and shanty shacks attached to their premise so long as a certain square footage of one wall is open to the elements.
Maybe the Snooker Barge can have a tin roofed lean-to welded onto the side of a bulkhead.
This is easy . . . a new ordinance which INCLUDES the Casino as non-smoking. The Council got it right the first time (no smoking), but they are addicted like crack cocaine to the money from Aztar which bails them out from making hard decisions (like closing the Zoo, etc.)–so they wanted the best of both worlds. Supreme Court says you can’t have it both ways.
Bing-O! I surely don’t want to set foot any any nasty, smoky eating place. So, until such an ordinance happens, I hope businesses clearly label themselves as “smoke-free” or “smokey.”
Those who have fought and died for our rights to be free should be proud of a right that should not be denied freedom!!!
What? That bastion of intellect, the Evansville City Council, found in violation of the State Constitution? Heaven forbid! There must be some Snegal way around this smack down.
Smoking will be back in bars? Gross!!! It’s terrible not to be able to go to bars because of the smoke.
There were plenty of non smoking bars before the ban and there still will be plenty.
Name one.
Hoosiers lounge.
Time out lounge
Bokeh Lounge, Talk of the Town, that’s two more.
So is the Indianapolis smoking ban that gives exception to tobacco stores and hooka lounges unconstitutional too?
…..
Equal means equal. You cannot carve out an exception for some constituency you favor discriminating against. Smokers were correct to point out the law was NOT being delivered to ALL. Justice prevailed against discrimination. Laws must be applied to ALL equally. Who knew. Smokers riding on the backs of same-sex married couples who correctly petitioned the Court that Marriage Law was not being applied equally to all constituencies? (In that case, the final law of the land, the Supreme Court)?
….
That’s right. I’m rubbing that in the discriminator’s face…. It’s well deserved. (lol)
That’s really big of you, but best wipe the egg off your own face first.
Never wrestle with a pig. You just end up with mud all over yourself…. and the pig enjoys it.
So now I’m pig? Is that a sociopath pig? You’re censorship campaign isn’t going to work against me Brains. After all, I’m just a pig.
….Man, what goes around comes around. You’re a Pig? The Pigs put themselves in charge, set themselves up in the farmer’s house instead of the Barn. And when the other animals said, “Wait a minute. You said we were all equal. What gives?”
And the Pigs famously said, “Well we are all equal. But some of us are more equal than others.”
Your story left out the part were the republatheocrat pigs appoint themselves as the Ministers of Morality. Then the pervs, err I mean Ministers sit in judgement of your sex life and have the secret police(their jobs program) spy on women to make sure they’re not using birth control, having sex for fun or getting an abortion.
Then the republaplutocratic pigs sit down and write all the rules, terms, and condition to the game of capitalism and of course the rules only favor the already rich and powerful. Then when the brown pigs all say “hey wait a minute those guys are cheating and stealing all the nice things” the republaplutocratic pigs reply “You’re just being hateful and jealous”
…I don’t remember some of that. And I don’t think all Republicans apply to your storyline.
But, I do agree with the Supreme Court (and the Indiana Court) that the law must be applied equally, and a citizen’s right to access to the law is unconstitutional unless it is accessible equally.
Equal is equal. Of course the Pigs living in the Farmer’s House have some strange ideas about what equal really means…well…because they’re Pigs.
(Acknowledging some of the extreme Christians still believe outside of the law. Alas, ignorant and hateful people can’t be jailed for believing in illegal laws.)
Good Guy Brains,
IIT true that it was not me who hi-jacked this thread with an uncalled for “rubbing it in?
IIT that states must license every sexual relationship?
IIT that my points have been clear and my concern has been focused on the constitutional process not lifestyles?
IIT I have never once turned it into a moral issue, judged anyone, or said they must believe as I believe?
IIT That such an accusation is a lie straight from the “good guy’s” lips that has called me a bigot, sociopath, and pig?
IIT that you’re the one who has judged others, called them names, and demonstrated a loathing hate for anyone who does not believe like you, Christianity in particular?
IIT that I’m will not throw my pearls to pigs, and will not start a whisper campaign of censorship like a bunch teenage girls gossiping on the playground?
IIT this nonsense needs to stop and we should focus on the issues not the personalities?
Exactly, so opening up marriage to homosexuals based on consent and commitment yet denying it to others with the same qualifications in not “equal means equal.”
Don’t know why you had to hijack the topic, but glad to see you’re starting to think.
…..
1. It’s on topic. The topic is the case was decided on equal treatment under the law.
2. Glad you decided you have the right to open, or not open, marriage up to citizens.
3. At this point, same-sex marriage is over. Even the US Department of Justice says so (and so did Fox News and the WSJ in reporting the precedent was the Supreme Court ruling of violation of equal treatment under the law.)
4. What you’re saying? It’s not about the law, it’s just whining you don’t like it.
5. The smoking case? It is a perfect example of “equal means equal.” Of course not if you enshrine illegal discrimination in your day to day life.
The point is that you played the putz high-jacked a thread to poke me in the eye and you think you’re being cute.
The Smoking ban singled out the Casino for preferential treatment when there was nothing to differentiate them from Mom and Pop’s Tinman Brew and Burgers.
Homosexual marriage singles out homosexuals to qualify for marriage but denies it to others and penalizes those who do not seek state approval of their shared lives.
Oh Wait! I got Brains all wrong. You’re the pig!
….
You know I-E, you’re arguments are silly.
There is no homosexual marriage law that offers preferential treatment. There are marriage laws.
And the Supreme Court, and the Indiana Supreme Court, ruled access to the law, all laws, including smoking laws and marriage laws, must be applied equally, otherwise that law is unconstitutional.
Now….if you got some other idea for another law…join the crowd. Hope it meets Constitutional muster.
Silly? When was Indiana’s marriage ordinance been ruled unconstitutional?
….
I-E,
It sure appears to me….the Indiana Supreme Court just ruled on an equal protection under the law clause with this smoking case. But…
IF the State passes a discrimination amendment to try to gain the favor of a Drudge report watching bunch of Tea Party Animals
and
IF that law passes the muster of the Indiana Supreme Court…I would be surprised.
In fact, they will be embarrased.
But I dont’ expect that. They don’t want to be identified as unconstitutional illegal discriminators. (I’m being polite here)
It sure looks like they ALREADY know the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled against DOMA based on equal protection…and THEY are already showing a predisposition to rule on equal protection based on this smoking case.
But I-E go ahead and spew insignificant whining arguments about homosexual marriage laws (that don’t exist!) and how you believe those laws show preferential treatment.
You know. There was a day when you made real arguments. But you’ve grossly lost your bearing on this issue. You’re demeaning yourself needlessly.
Wienz, stop moving the goal post.
When has Indiana’s marriage law been ruled unconstitutional?
It hasn’t, move on. I am.
This is good news. Many of us have been complaining about this terrible ordinance for a while now.
I will only patronize those bars who remain non-smoking, yet, I am glad the unequal cronyism show to the casino is a thing of the past.
I agree, Brad. I expect the end result will be that the Casino goes “smoke-free”. If that happened, and they gut the place and get rid of the stench, I might even go there once in a while.
I bet (pun intended) they go Evansville free first.
Process of the three individual but equal executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government worked as intended of the founding fathers visions.
Does not matter which side of this issue you were on, we are all winners of the process.
This is all downhill. It is mop up time.
….the SCOTUS ruling striking down DOMA’s discrimination against same-sex married couples based on its failure to provide equal protection under the law..
…broke the damn on this. Scalia went nuts in his minority opinion because HE KNOWS….
…AND the Indiana Supreme Court also knows…THAT ruling commenced a process that will eventually invalidate every State law banning same-sex marriage.
Good. It took til 1967 for the courts to eliminate existing State bans in interracial marriage. This is taking less time… Bigots lose, as they should.
So what you[re telling us is that the Indiana supreme court has already decided a case they has yet to be filed on an amendment that has yet to be ratified? And you don’t see a problem with that?
What are you going to do when that mop flops the other way?
And I hear that cry of the losing argument again “BWAK BIGOT!”
(@Weinz)
The drip, drip, drip of positive court rulings for gay rights has turned into a thud, thud, thud for those who would deny them all the rights afforded to heterosexual couples. This is as it should be. The horrible positions the antis pretzel themselves into while attempting to duck (dynasty) being labeled what they are is amusing.
We are fortunate to have at least one locally who puts the big in bigot. This helps those who don’t follow the topic make a quick determination about who’s right. It has the ancillary benefit of letting them expend what little credibility they ever had on other subjects. Mindless railing against same sex marriage will do that. All good.
Comments are closed.