Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 847.09 (2025)
Legislative intent.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
847.09 Legislative intent.—
(1) In order to make the application and enforcement of ss. 847.07-847.09 uniform throughout the state, it is the intent of the Legislature to preempt the field, to the exclusion of counties and municipalities, insofar as it concerns exposing persons over 17 years of age to harmful motion pictures, exhibitions, shows, representations, and presentations. To that end, it is hereby declared that every county ordinance and every municipal ordinance adopted prior to July 1, 1973, and relating to said subject shall stand abrogated and unenforceable on and after such date and that no county, municipality, or consolidated county-municipal government shall have the power to adopt any ordinance relating to the subject on or after such effective date. If ss. 847.07-847.09 are declared to be illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise unenforceable, any county or municipal ordinance abrogated before ss. 847.07-847.09 were declared unconstitutional shall be in full force and effect, and each county, municipality, and consolidated county-municipal government shall have the power to adopt ordinances relating to this subject.
(2) Nothing in ss. 847.07-847.09 shall be construed to repeal or in any way supersede the provisions of s. 847.011, s. 847.012, or s. 847.013.
(3) Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the free exercise of free speech or picketing by any organization, group, or individual for the purpose of upholding community standards.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1983–2002 · leading case: City of Miami Springs v. JJT, INC., 437 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
City of Miami Springs v. JJT, INC., 437 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). “As the City Commission specifically stated, the ordinance in question does not attempt to ban obscene performances or activities, but instead reaches sex-related activities in liquor establishments whether obscene or not.”
Alexis, Inc. v. Pinellas Cnty., Florida, 194 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (M.D. Fla. 2002). “Instead, they assert that such raids, particularly during specially promoted or “premium” events, were conducted in egregious fashion and with the intent to maximize the harassment and disruption of Plaintiffs’ businesses and that such entries were warrantless searches in…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.