Located in:. Cincinnati, Ohio, United States. This amount is subject to change until you make payment. For additional information, see the Global Shipping Program terms and conditions - opens in a new window or tab This amount includes applicable customs duties, taxes, brokerage and other fees. For additional information, see the Global Shipping Program terms and conditions - opens in a new window or tab. Seller does not accept returns See details.
See payment details. Special financing available. Any international shipping is paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc. Learn More - opens in a new window or tab International shipping and import charges paid to Pitney Bowes Inc.
Learn More - opens in a new window or tab Any international shipping and import charges are paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc. Learn More - opens in a new window or tab Any international shipping is paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc.
Learn More - opens in a new window or tab. Related sponsored items. Showing Slide 1 of 3. New New New. Seller Pre-owned Pre-owned Pre-owned. Report item - opens in a new window or tab. Seller assumes all responsibility for this listing.
Item specifics. Pre-owned: An item that has been used or worn previously. Read more about the condition Pre-owned: An item that has been used or worn previously. See all condition definitions opens in a new window or tab. College, Reunion. Size Type:. Shipping and handling. Hotel Online Special Report. Justice Department. In fact, while we, like any other customer-service company in the U.
Our Daytona Beach property has served for years as the headquarters hotel for the Black College Reunion and has been the leading corporate sponsor of the event. We will, of course, cooperate fully with the Department of Justice in every phase of its investigation. The unanticipated, overwhelming number of attendees at the annual event eventually led both schools to decline official sponsorship. For the reasons that follow, the Court finds that portions of the TMP for BCR violate the First Amendment's guarantee of the right to assemble, the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of the right to equal protection under the law, and the right to travel under the Dormant Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Having reached this decision, the Court declines to reach Plaintiffs' other arguments at this time. Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution delegates to the Congress "the authority to regulate interstate commerce. California, U. In Edwards, the state of California made it a crime to bring indigents into the state. Since this case involves people from across the country Doc. C , the Dormant Commerce Clause is implicated. It is clear that Defendants are giving preferences in access to Defendant City to residents over non-residents.
Each of the favored groups that are entitled to vehicle passes allowing entrance to the City by vehicle includes individuals who are residents or who benefit residents. Further, the provision for passes in combination with the subjective discretion of the authorities to close bridges to vehicular access by persons who do not hold such passes, as is discussed below, also violates the Dormant Commerce Clause.
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment directs that "all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike. Davis, U. Lichenstein, F. When government action "fails to treat classes alike, it may constitute a violation of the equal protection clause. However, such action will be upheld if it is "rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
In addition, the issuance of passes in favor of certain individuals is also unique to such plan. Defendants claim that the BCR participants are not similarly situated as the participants of other events. In this regard, Defendants suggest that the congestion is due to BCR participants socializing with pedestrians while driving or in relation to their vehicles while on Atlantic Avenue Highway A1A in Defendant City.
However, Defendant Skinner suggests that the socialization results from the traffic congestion. In legal parlance, Defendants have not demonstrated that BCR participants are not similarly situated as participants in other activities and, thus, Defendants have not justified the differential treatment. Restrictions of this right are proper only when they relate to the time, place, or manner of the assembly and "are narrowly tailored to serve significant governmental interests and leave open ample alternative channels of communication.
Walsh, F. Requiring a residence, business ownership, rental of a hotel room in a beach community, or a job in order to be given priority in the right to assemble denies individuals "an equal opportunity to be heard" and to assemble. Pennsylvania, U.
The Court finds that granting the passes proposed in the TMP for Daytona Beach residents, registered hotel guests, and business owners and their employees does not comport with the First Amendment's guarantee that the right of assembly will not be tied to an individual's economic status or residence. Although Daytona Beach is offering shuttle service to the beach and attendees who are physically able may walk from the mainland over the bridges to the beach side, such alternatives to those offered to a select group who are able to drive to such area based on their economic or residence status constitute an unwarranted impediment to freedom of assembly in the Daytona Beach area.
Daytona Beach implicitly acknowledges this conclusion by offering favored status in the form of passes to its residents, hotel guests, and business owners and employees. The TMP for BCR vests unbridled discretion in local law enforcement officials to determine when those without passes will be prevented from crossing the bridges to enter the City of Daytona Beach. The TMP provides that it shall be implemented "if traffic on Atlantic Avenue became congested to the point that public safety was jeopardized.
Thus, the bridges can be closed to vehicular traffic except for those persons who have been issued passes for such number and length of times as local law officials determine in their sole discretion. At oral argument, Daytona Beach defended this provision by suggesting that traffic control is an "art" and defies objective criteria.
Nationalist Movement, U. The TMP's amorphous standard, which is congestion that "jeopardizes public safety," is too vague to allow meaningful review by the judiciary. Thus, the lack of objective standards in the TMP for BCR would prevent a court from determining whether local law enforcement deviated from the law in favor of or against a particular group.
Consequently, local law enforcement could implement the TMP at its whim to discourage or prevent certain individuals from access to the City of Daytona Beach.
0コメント