enquirer.com

News
Front Page
Local
Sports
-Bengals
-Reds
-Bearcats
-Xavier
Business
Health
Technology
Weather
Traffic
Back Issues
Photographs
AP Wire
-World
-Nation
-Sports
-Business
-Arts
-Health

Classifieds
Jobs
Autos
General
Obits
Homes

Freetime
Movies
Dining
Calendars
Weekend

Opinion
Columns
Borgman

GoCinci
HelpDesk
Feedback
Circulation
Subscribe
Phone #'s
Search

E N Q U I R E R   L O C A L   N E W S   C O V E R A G E
Saturday, June 26, 1999

Court upholds Cincinnati noise law


Judges reject claim of unconstitutionality

BY DAN HORN
The Cincinnati Enquirer

        An appeals court upheld Cincinnati's noise ordinance Friday, concluding it is a reasonable law that does not unfairly target African-Americans.

        The law was passed by City Council two years ago despite claims by some that it was an unconstitutional attempt to curb weekend gatherings of young people in Eden Park.

        Because those gatherings primarily involve African-Americans, oppo nents argued the law was aimed at them.

        Cincinnati attorney Kenneth Lawson raised the issue after police cited three black men in Eden Park during the summer of 1997.

        The Ohio 1st District Court of Appeals reviewed the cases and determined Friday that the law was fair and police did nothing wrong when they cited the men for violating it.

        Mr. Lawson, who vowed to appeal the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, contends a disproportionate number of blacks have been charged with violating the ordinance.

        In his argument to the appeals court, he submitted a review of city records that showed 79 percent of those cited under the law were black.

        But in a 3-0 decision, the judges concluded those statistics are not sufficient to prove the law is unconstitutional.

        The judges also rejected Mr. Lawson's claim that the law was vague and resulted in arbitrary enforcement by police.

        Mr. Lawson had argued that the law was too subjective because it referred to “unreasonable noise” that causes “inconvenience or annoyance to persons of ordinary sensibilities.”

        “Such terms are not beyond the grasp of the average person,” the judges wrote. “We hold that this standard is sufficiently definite so as to prohibit arbitrary enforcement.”

       



Tornado stole a Cincinnati treasure: trees
Officers in shooting return to street duty
Three kids nearly drown
Rail killings suspect was held and let go
Powerball fever drives Ohioans across the river
Refugee family makes way to Tristate
Miami U tuition rise may be 6%
Plane crash spares pilot's life
Police dogs, trainers compete
Portman: Fix Social Security
Alexander: Look me over
Chevie Kehoe gets life for 3 murders
Classic cars strut proudly
Closed-door meeting on Shirey upheld
Man trumps township in Wild West grave saga
New park gives home to skaters
Borge at 90: still deft, charming, hilarious
Fixer-uppers: Consider software before trip to hardware store
GET TO IT
Cancer survivors gather for ice cream and joy
Cinergy truck hit by train in Butler
- Court upholds Cincinnati noise law
Day care rated as deficient in Ky.
Driver shot through window
Felled by stroke, young swimmer fights to recover
GOP gloats on getting Democrats
Mayor vs. council disputes derail Ludlow budget
Search for police chief postponed
Silverton pool opening delayed
TRISTATE DIGEST
Turfway head knows horses
Wyoming celebrates 125 years


 
Search | Questions/help | News tips | Letters to the editors
Web advertising | Place a classified | Subscribe | Circulation

Copyright 1995-2000. The Cincinnati Enquirer, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper.
Use of this site signifies agreement to terms of service updated 4/5/2000.