“Johnson concedes that the City had a factual basis for suspending her business license— that a violent, gang-related shooting occurred on her restaurant’s premises. And the City’s decision to suspend her license based on that fact cannot be characterized as an instance of “extreme irrationality.” ”

That’s from Judge Nalbandian’s dissent. Things can only be 180 degrees out from correct. This quote proves otherwise. The issue, judge, is whether one’s license to do business, which, after all, is a property right (you know, something protected by the Fifth Amendment) can be conditioned on the fact of uncontrollable third party criminal acts AND some government official’s decision that this is a nuisance. In other words, the City may have had a reason, but the basis of the decision is so beyond the pale. By that rationale, the City could condemn a private residence on the basis that people broke in and killed a family member.

What should have happened is that the official who suspended the license should have been charged under 18 USC 242, violation of rights under color of law. And of course, this sort of thing is not an isolated incident. About a decade ago, a Boston city vehicle jumped the curb and slammed into an apartment building. Within a day, code enforcement was out issuing code violations. This is how local governments roll, and it’s high time judges started understanding those basic realities.