IBJNews

American Legion challenges Indiana smoking ban

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An American Legion post in northeastern Indiana has asked a federal judge to put a hold on a statewide smoking ban set to take effect Sunday.

Indianapolis attorney Scott Barnhart filed the lawsuit on behalf of American Legion Post 243 in Ligonier, 40 miles northwest of Fort Wayne, in U.S. District Court on Thursday. The lawsuit contends the smoking ban is too vague and violates the equal protection clause of the state and federal constitutions. It seeks a preliminary injunction preventing the state from enforcing the ban.

State attorney general's office spokeswoman Erin Reese said the office had not yet seen the lawsuit. She said the office will file a response at the appropriate time.

Gov. Mitch Daniels signed Indiana's first statewide smoking restrictions in March after the addition of compromises expanding the number of exemptions helped it narrowly clear the state Senate. The law exempts Indiana's bars, casinos, retail tobacco shops and private clubs, such as American Legion posts.

But the new law also says facilities that permit smoking can't host events at which children will be present. The lawsuit says the post in Ligonier has about 20 children in the facility each week and between 25 and 50 people per day are usually at the post.

The post recently spent $917 on an air-cleaning device, and it has "dramatically improved" the air quality in the building, the lawsuit says.

The post contends the law is too vague because it encourages arbitrary enforcement and because it fails to describe with "sufficient particularity" what an individual or entity must do to satisfy the law. The lawsuit also says the law violates the equal protection clause of the constitution because the fraternal group has been "irrationally singled out and is intentionally treated differently from gambling facilities."

Finally, the lawsuit contends the law violates the state's freedom of conscience provision, saying it interferes with the post members' individual decision to smoke or not.

The lawsuit seeks attorneys' fees and costs and any other relief, as well as a permanent injunction against the law.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Smokers logic?
    It is not oppresive, it is a law forcing smokers to show a little common courtesy! Do you smoke around your grandchildren or children? And why? You don't want THIER lungs ruined! Well I don't wany mine ruined either! Take it outside!
  • Legion smokers
    The American legion has been around nearly 100 years and us non-smokers have tolerated your smoke with no recourse what-so-ever! Now the shoe is on the other foot for less than 2 months and ya cry like babies, what gives?
  • Your property rights
    The state seems to accept the loss of personal property rights pretty well. I suppose the common view is that this only affects smokers, however when has government ever Not expanded on the infringement of Liberties once we give up the basics. We allowed through this legislation the Government to classify Private Buisinesses as Public Property, get ready for the rest of the regulations.... its just a matter of time now. We gave it to them.
  • My Hats off to you!
    Hey look, the veterans who fought for our freedom in the armed services are still fighting for our freedoms. My hats off to all veterans and especially the members of this Legion who are fighting against this oppressive law!

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Good ole' Obamacare. Thanks liberals and those who didn't bother to vote.

    2. Yes. Blame those who were too lazy to go vote Obama out and those who voted him in again. That's my take on it. I know folks won't get it on the left. OK. Start berating me now!

    3. Serioulsy, people are AGINST this project? Most communities would be salivating over a project like this. You'd rather have an empty eye-sore gas station and shacks posing as apartments? This project is exactly what BR needs. BUILD IT MR MAYOR. And yes, I am a BR resident, and have been for 20 years.

    4. As a St. Vincent employee of over 20 years, I am saddened and disheartened by this announcement. Unfortunately, as the healthcare "industry" continues on this political and corporate path, all that St. Vincent Hospital has stood for spiritually for its employees and this community is being sucked dry. I know it truly has no choice. It is not just Obamacare or just competition or just any single thing. This trend started long before I was even born when the government became involved in healthcare and it became an "industry." I grieve for those who will lose their jobs, one of whom may be me, but I also grieve for this hospital which I have served for over 20 years. May God give us and it the grace to withstand the future of healthcare.

    5. Why do people constantly harp on this issue and act ignorant about what a city population measures? A city's population is the city's population. There is no argument or debate about it. If you want to measure the density of a city--measure it. If you want to measure the size of a metropolitan area, then measure the metropolitan population. City boundaries cover different sized areas--and they always have (though the disparity has probably increased since about 1900 or so when more cities began annexing their surrounding communities). For example, San Francisco only covers 49 square miles while Houston cover nearly 600 square miles. No one argues about the population rankings of either city even though they clearly cover extremely different sized areas. Indianapolis is the 13 largest city by population in the U.S. That is a fact. While the population of a metropolitan area may give you a better sense of how large a community is, as noted, even metro areas can vary widely in the size of geographic area they cover--so that is not a perfect comparison either.

    ADVERTISEMENT