Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1
b. The purpose of the ordinance is to regulate public morals. The ban is o The spirit behind the Ordinance is to curtail sexual behavior since
rooted in the police power as conferred on LGU’s by the Local Government these establishments are notorious for venues for prostitution,
Code. Brief discussion on police power: adultery, and fornications.
i. No exact definition but it highlights its comprehensiveness and its o Despite the veracity of such, legitimate sexual behavior, which is
flexibility to meet different conditions. constitutionally protected, will be curtailed as well.
ii. It is based on the necessity of the State and its corresponding right o The concept of liberty compels respect for the individual
to protect itself and its people. whose claim to privacy and interference demands respect.
iii. Although the goal of regulating public morals falls under the purview o There are other legitimate activities that may be affected by
of police power, it does not automatically justify any and all means the Ordinance and that cannot be discounted.
of achieving this goal. Applying the Test to the Ordinance:
1. The means must still align with the Constitution, the Bill of o The Court did not use the rational basis test in this case because
Rights, and specifically due process. the ordinance did not just prejudice the property or business of the
c. Due process evades a precise definition. petitioners, but the constitutional rights of their patrons as well.
i. The purpose of due process is to prevent arbitrary government They would be deprived of availing short time access or wash-up
encroachment against the life, liberty, and property of individuals rates to lodging establishments.
ii. Two kinds of due process: o This thus constitutes a restriction on the fundamental right to
1. Procedural: procedures government must follow before it liberty, which must pass the strict scrutiny test.
deprives a person of life, liberty or property. The Government must show that no other alternative
2. Substantive: inquires whether the government has for the accomplishment of the purpose that is less
sufficient justification for depriving a person of life, intrusive.
liberty or property There must be a reasonable relation between the
3. Test: purpose of the measure and the means for its
accomplishment because such measure will be struck
Test Source/Case Means End Application down if it arbitrarily intrudes into private rights.
Freedom of the o Urban decay as seen in the rampant prostitution, drug use, and
mind adultery, should not be used to prevent legitimate businesses from
US v. offering a legitimate product.
Strict Liberty
Carolene Necessary Compelling The Ordinance did not distinguish between the places
Scrutiny Restricting the
Products frequented by people doing illicit activities and those
political
doing legitimate actions.
process
What the Ordinance seeks to curtail is already prohibited,
Intermediate Craig v. Gender so why not apply those laws instead?
Substantial Important There are other less intrusive ways in curbing prostitution
Scrutiny Boren Legitimacy
and drug use – active police work or strict enforcement of
US v. laws regulating prostitution.
Rational Economic o Individual rights may be adversely affected only to the extent that
Carolene Reasonable Legitimate
Basis legislation may fairly be required by the legitimate demands of public interest.
Products
o The promotion of public welfare and a sense of morality among
Discussion on Liberty citizens deserve the full endorsement of the judiciary provided that
o Not a list of what may be done or not be done such measures don’t trample rights this Court is sworn to protect.
o Atmosphere of freedom where they don’t feel labored under a Big
Brother as they interact with each other, their society, and nature, DISPOSITIVE PORTION
in a manner innately understood by them as inherent, without WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is
REVERSED, and the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 9, is
doing harm or injury to others
REINSTATED. Ordinance No. 7774 is hereby declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL. No
o Right to exist and to be free from arbitrary servitude or restraint pronouncement as to costs.
2
SO ORDERED
OTHER NOTES
2. WoN petitioners have standing to plead for protection of their patrons’ equal protection
rights
Petitioners were arguing that their business is being unlawfully interfered by the
Ordinance and that it infringed on their clients’ right to equal protection.
According to the Court, they have standing. The third party standing and the
overbreadth doctrine applies.
o In Powers v. Ohio, the US SC outlined the criteria to invoke such
standing:
Petitioner must have suffered an injury-in-fact, giving him a
sufficient concrete interest in the outcome of the issue at
hand.
Petitioner must have a close relation to the the third party.
There is a hindrance between the third party and his ability to
protect his interests.
o In overbreadth analysis, challengers to government action are allowed
to raise the rights of third parties.
o This doctrine applies when a statue restrains constitutionally
guaranteed rights.
o The petitioners here are alleging that the Ordinance intrudes on their
right to liberty of their clients, therefore the overbreadth doctrine
applies.