Oppression or Rightous Use of Government Power?

[ColoWayno]

http://www.volokh.com/2012/07/25/no-...-sex-marriage/

The Chicago Tribune reports:

[Chicago Alderman] Proco “Joe” Moreno announced this week that he will block Chick-fil-A’s effort to build its second Chicago store … following company President Dan Cathy’s remarks last week that he was “guilty as charged” for supporting the biblical definition of marriage as between a man and woman….

The alderman has the ideological support of Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

“Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values,” the mayor said in a statement when asked about Moreno’s decision. “They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents. This would be a bad investment, since it would be empty.”

Moreno is relying on a rarely violated Chicago tradition known as aldermanic privilege, which dictates that City Council members defer to the opinion of the ward alderman on local issues. Last year Moreno wielded that weapon to block plans for a Wal-Mart in his ward, saying he had issues with the property owner and that Wal-Mart was not “a perfect fit for the area.” …

The alderman, serving his first full term, dismissed any First Amendment concerns.

“You have the right to say what you want to say, but zoning is not a right,” he said, adding that he also had concerns about traffic in the area….

In Boston, Mayor Thomas Menino reportedly took a similar view:

Mayor Thomas M. Menino is vowing to block Chick-fil-A from bringing its Southern-fried fast-food empire to Boston … after the family-owned firm’s president suggested gay marriage is “inviting God’s judgment on our nation.”

But denying a private business permits because of such speech by its owner is a blatant First Amendment violation. Even when it comes to government contracting — where the government is choosing how to spend government money — the government generally may not discriminate based on the contractor’s speech, see Board of County Commissioners v. Umbehr (1996). It is even clearer that the government may not make decisions about how people will be allowed to use their own property based on the speaker’s past speech.

[DoctorWho]

It's risky to take a position opposite Eugene.

[Mark E. Hurling]

Chicago is now the equivalent of LA with this kind of nonesense. Rahm "Dead Fish" Emanuel has already displayed his weakness with his limp plea for peace to the gangs killing left, right, and center with a huge crime wave there just now. Instead of turning loose Da Boyz in Blue to do what they get paid for, we get this from him as a feel good. Daley wept. Cermak is rolling in his grave. For all it's flaws and misdirected BS Chicago was once known as the city that works.

[Corrie]

I'm not sure how anyone can stand up for this if they care at all for liberty or freedom.

I am all for gay rights, I think what Chik-Fil-A did was a bad move business wise and I disagree wholeheartedly with their stance. However, I have no problem with them building stores and selling chicken...

If the public feels that they should not be allowed to build stores and sell chicken then they should vote with their wallet and stop going to their business. Let the market decide!

EDIT; I've been reading some more about this. Apparently the mayor/government doesn't actually have any power to restrict them, just to use their public position to denounce the company. Is that correct? If so it sounds like the mayor is acting within his role.

[Chebass88]

Where does this horseshit stop?

What if the zoning officer is a devout Christian Scientist? When the construction permit for a new doctor's office comes up, does he (she) get to veto that construction?

Here's another one. What if the zoning official is a devout Jew or Muslim & there is an application in for a permit to build a sausage store. Can they turn it down as pork is "unclean" (in their view)?

Can the animal rights activist turn down an application for a "Diane Furs" outlet?

Could this be made even more ridiculous by having a white racist block construction of a hair salon catering to black folks? (Of course not, that would be "discrimination" - I included it here as I see this in the same style of nonsense)



My suggestion is thus: build the Chick-fil-A (which in turn generates TAX revenue for the city. Let the patrons decide via their patronage whether they enjoy a fried chicken sandwich, waffle fries, and a milkshake from Chick-Fil-A. If they do, great. If not, great. If the business flops, so be it - another chain can come in and peddle their wares.

The more pertinent question is whether the citizens of Chicago will forego getting fried chicken from "Harold's Chicken Shack" in favor of Chick-Fil-A. Damn, that stuff was tasty...

[KUUCman]

The more pertinent question is whether the citizens of Chicago will forego getting fried chicken from "Harold's Chicken Shack" in favor of Chick-Fil-A. Damn, that stuff was tasty...

mmm... I get some from the west loop since I work downtown and it's ok, but it doesn't compare to getting some late night in Hyde Park.

[gzt]

mmm... I get some from the west loop since I work downtown and it's ok, but it doesn't compare to getting some late night in Hyde Park.

Word. The roll on next door to the liquor store, you got yourself an evening.

[Chebass88]

mmm... I get some from the west loop since I work downtown and it's ok, but it doesn't compare to getting some late night in Hyde Park.

I was in Chicago for work a couple of years ago, and my friends and I went to Harold's (I forget the location). On the way there (we took the subway), it was snowing pretty bad, so taking it back to our hotel would have just resulted in cold chicken. We walked into the lobby of the Hilton hotel, pulled some tables together & had a fried chicken dinner (with hot sauce, of course!). We got some pretty dirty looks, but no one said anything.

[matclone]

EDIT; I've been reading some more about this. Apparently the mayor/government doesn't actually have any power to restrict them, just to use their public position to denounce the company. Is that correct? If so it sounds like the mayor is acting within his role.

There you go. But some here are clearly more invested in taking offense than in getting to the truth of any given matter.

[ColoWayno]

There you go. But some here are clearly more invested in taking offense than in getting to the truth of any given matter.

You guys need to explain this. It seems like they are being blocked to me.

Moreno is relying on a rarely violated Chicago tradition known as aldermanic privilege, which dictates that City Council members defer to the opinion of the ward alderman on local issues. Last year Moreno wielded that weapon to block plans for a Wal-Mart in his ward, saying he had issues with the property owner and that Wal-Mart was not “a perfect fit for the area.” …

Are you saying this "weapon" can't be used to block Chick-fil-A?