You say they closed the bar. How?
Did the state confiscate the deed? They had no right. Did they tell him he couldn't let people in the building? If he owned the building, he can let anyone he wants inside.
(As an aside: Did he even own the building? If not, did his landlord have a beef with him? Could he pay the rent after the business was closed?)
If his liquor license was yanked, that effectively closed his business.
The state can yank a liquor license whenever it wants. If this guy posted materials intended to incite violent emotions in a place where he was simultaneously selling liquor, the state could weigh its liability in any potential consequences and withdraw his right to sell. If he continued to sell in defiance of the state's ruling, they couldn't confiscate the liquor (not purchased by them), but they could forcibly close the building to enforce the revokation of the license.
You dance with the state, the state makes the rules.
If he stopped serving and police came with padlocks to forcibly close the building anyway, that's different, and he can sue.
He can continue to display his art on the premises of his business. Or he can have his state license, and display his art elsewhere. That's the way it is, isn't it?
Regards--
Mary Anne
Current Events » in reply to Re: Did he call the ACLU?
You didn't explain the circumstances
The whole thread (43 posts)
- More leftist hypocracy
- Did you read this first?
- Re: Hyppocrat
- About the art
- Typical.
- Re: More leftist hypocracy
- your "control reflexive liberalism"
