Earlier this year, in Hodkins v. Peterson, Mayor of Indianapolis (1/22/04 USCA 7th Cir.) the 7th Circuit ruled, in the words of the Indianapolis Star, that "that Indiana's curfew law was unconstitutional because it could dissuade children from exercising their First Amendment rights for fear of being arrested." (see earlier Indiana Law Blog entries here and here.)
On March 17th, Governor Kernan signed HEA 1449, which provides that:
A law enforcement officer may not detain a child or take a child into custody based on a violation of this section unless the law enforcement officer, after making a reasonable determination and considering the facts and surrounding circumstances, reasonably believes that:The change takes effect immediately.
(1) the child has violated this section; and
(2) there is no legal defense to the violation.
This story today in the Chicago Tribune is a reminder that the 7th Circuit ruling affected not only Indianapolis and the entire State of Indiana, but also called into question laws and ordinances in the other states which are part of the 7th Circuit. The lead:
After a hiatus of several weeks caused by a successful court challenge to curfews elsewhere, Chicago this weekend will resume enforcing curfews for people 16 years old and younger, city officials announced today.Posted by Marcia Oddi at March 18, 2004 04:37 PMEnforcement begins Saturday night and follows City Council action last week to revise city ordinances after a federal appellate court ruling that struck down an Indiana curfew law. * * *
Chicago police stopped enforcing curfew Feb. 12 after the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Illinois, struck down an Indiana curfew law on Jan. 22, saying it violated the 1st Amendment rights of juveniles.
The decision came in a case in which a 15-year-old boy was arrested outside an Indianapolis restaurant after 11 p.m. Before being released to his parents 2½ hours later, he was given a breath test, was required to submit to a urine sample and was asked personal questions about his family.
In its ruling, the court said Indiana's law violated minors' constitutional rights because it left them vulnerable to arrest and also interfered with parents' rights to raise their children as they see fit.