I agree that it would be an utterly amazing result if, in the end, and after Supreme Court review, Renton vanishes, reversed, and all of the horrible things that ensued from it over the decades are reduced to footnotes in Law Review articles. The legal fiction - or downright lie - that lies behind Renton and all the cases that pointed to it for authority have been used everywhere, from Times Square to the North Side of Chicago, even in rural locations, to repress, limit, stifle, and injure adult entertainment. It's why Chicago, with four million people in the city itself, has and can only have four permitted gentlemen's clubs. Every other location is "too close" to residential uses. I don't expect that to happen, but it's hard to predict what this Supreme Court will do. It has upset the applecart WRT to gun rights, gay marriage, etc. and does not seem to be afraid of results with practically enormous consequences.
The Third Circuit (earlier this year) has already upheld the main parts of 2257, determining only the inspection requirements to be invalid, unconstitutional. But their reasoning is now suspect in light of the Reed case from the Supreme Court last Summer. So they granted rehearing, and that has the effect of entirely vacating their earlier decision. The whole 2257 case is once again up in the air in Philadelphia. The most recent request for short briefs dealing with Renton suggests that the Third Circuit wants to hear the government's argument in more detail why maybe the Renton line of cases can preserve their previous decision, reasoning on a somewhat different basis, one that government thinks (!) is more secure. Well, it's really not entirely clear that Renton applies here. The fiction was that Renton did not permit government to regulate adult content itself, but the "time, manner, and place" of expression so as to contain "adverse secondary effects" thought naturally to stem from adult entertainment, such as a reduction in property values, more nuisance crime drawn to the vicinity, etc. Well, the exploitation of children (the basis of Section 2257) does not even come close to inevitably stemming from adult pornography, so it's not really an "adverse secondary effect" of adult expression. Renton really has seldom been upheld outside of the context of zoning and separation, licensing, signage, and things like requiring separation between dancer and patron, the privacy of arcade booths, and the degree of nudity permitted. It is conceivable that the Third Circuit will determine that Renton just doesn't apply - and that the Supreme Court might agree - invalidating Section 2257 based on Reed and applying strict scrutiny. It is also possible that the Third Circuit will conclude that Reed either implicitly reverses Renton or that Renton must be sharply limited to control "natural" consequences of adult entertainment. In each of those cases, 2257 may fall. The worst result likely to come in a practical sense is that Renton is used to uphold 2257, which is (at least in the immediate future) no worse a result than the decision already handed down by the Third Circuit earlier this year.
xbiz put up a direct link to my article in the November xbiz World -
XBIZ World - November 2015
Somebody asked about my picture. No idea. But it's still recognizably me, though it tends to show me in a mood far more serious than average.