Exam (elaborations)
AICP Exam Prep – Law Latest Update 100% Solved
- Course
- Institution
AICP Exam Prep – Law Latest Update 100% Solved
[Show more]
Content preview
AICP Exam Prep – Law Latest Update 100% SolvedMembers of City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent; U.S. Supreme Court (1984) -Answer The
Court found that the regulation of signs was valid for aesthetic reasons as long as the
ordinance
does not regulate the content of the sign. If the regulation is based on sign content, it must be
justified by a compelling governmental interest. The Court found that aesthetics advance a
legitimate state interest. The Court upheld a Los Angeles ordinance that banned attaching
signs
to utility poles.
City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.; U.S. Supreme Court (1986) -Answer The Court
found that placing restrictions on the time, place, and manner of adult entertainment is
acceptable. The ordinance was treating the secondary effects (such as traffic and crime), not
the
content. The Court found that the city does not have to guarantee that there is land available,
at
a reasonable price, for this use. However, the city cannot entirely prohibit adult
entertainment.
,The Court upheld a zoning ordinance that limited sexually oriented businesses to a single
zoning
district.
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 -Answer Following the
Supreme
Court's ruling in City of Boerne v. Flores, Congress passed the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act. The new act declares that no government may implement land
use regulation in a manner that imposes substantial burden on the religious assembly or
institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of burden both is in
furtherance of compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering
that compelling governmental interest. This act has been challenged in several legal cases, for
example in Civil Liberties for Urban Believers v. the City of Chicago. In this case, the Court
found
that changes that the City made to their zoning ordinance brought the ordinance into
compliance with RLUIPA. This act was also challenged in Cutter v. Wilkinson, U.S. Supreme
Court
(2005). The Court ruled that the Act is a constitutional religious accommodation under the
First
, Amendment's Establishment Clause.
Reed et al. v Town of Gilbert Arizona (2014) -Answer The pastor of a church rented space in
an elementary school and placed signs in the area announcing the time and location of the
church services. Gilbert's sign ordinance restricts the size, number, duration and location of
certain types of signs, including temporary signs. Gilbert advised the church that it had
violated
the sign code through the placement of the temporary signs. The church sued Gilbert claiming
that the sign code violated the free speech clause in the first amendment, as well as the equal
protection clause of the fourteenth amendment.
The US Supreme Court found that the city cannot impose more stringent restriction on signs
directing the public to a meeting on signs conveying other messages. The Court found the sign
ordinance was not content neutral.
United States v. Gettysburg Electric Railway Company; U.S. Supreme Court (1896) -Answer
The Court ruled that the acquisition of the national battlefield at Gettysburg served a valid
public purpose. This was the first significant legal case dealing with historic preservation.
Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon; U.S. Supreme Court (1922) -Answer The court found that
if
a regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking. This was the first takings ruling and
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller TheeGrades. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $13.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
75759 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now