The Rave Act: a Specious Solution to the Serious Problem of Increased Ecstasy Distribution: Is It Unconstitutionally Overbroad Erin Treacy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 28 | Number 2 Article 3 1-1-2006 The Rave Act: A Specious Solution to the Serious Problem of Increased Ecstasy Distribution: Is It Unconstitutionally Overbroad Erin Treacy Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_comm_ent_law_journal Part of the Communications Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Erin Treacy, The Rave Act: A Specious Solution to the Serious Problem of Increased Ecstasy Distribution: Is It Unconstitutionally Overbroad, 28 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 229 (2006). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol28/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Rave Act: A Specious Solution to the Serious Problem of Increased Ecstasy Distribution: Is It Unconstitutionally Overbroad? by ERIN TREACY* I. Introduction ............................................................................................. 230 II. The History of Raves and Ecstasy ........................................................ 231 A. "Rave Culture," MDMA and Ecstasy .................................................. 232 1. R ave C ulture .................................................................................. 232 2. M D M A ........................................................................................... 234 3. E cstasy ............................................................................................ 236 B . E lectronic M usic ..................................................................................... 238 1. N ew Technologies .......................................................................... 239 2. The DJ as Maestro of Electronic Music ...................................... 241 a) DJ as Composer-Performer ...................................................... 241 1) D J T echniques ............................................................................ 244 C. The Dance: The Audience's Response to the DJ's Performance ...... 244 III. The Crackhouse Statute Was Constitutional ....................................... 245 A. Elements of a "Crackhouse" Offense ................................................... 247 1. Section (a)(1) .................................................................................. 247 a) K now ingly ................................................................................... 247 b) Opened or Maintained a Place ................................................. 248 c) For the Purpose of ..................................................................... 248 2. Section (a)(2) .................................................................................. 248 a) M anaged or Controlled ............................................................. 249 b) Owner, Lessee, Agent, Employee or Mortgagee ................... 249 c) Knowingly Made it Available for the Purpose of .................. 249 1) Knowingly Made it Available ................................................... 249 2) For the Purpose of ..................................................................... 250 IV. Early Attempts to Use the Crackhouse Statute to Shut D own R aves ............................................................................ 250 * Juris Doctor, Florida International University College of Law, 2005. The author would like to thank Professor Angelique Ortega Fridman for her invaluable insight and guidance and Nancy Treacy and Fran Meyer for their unwavering support. HASTINGS COMM/ENT L.J. [28:229 V. The H istory of the RA VE Act .............................................................. 253 VI. The RAVE Act is Unconstitutional ..................................................... 256 A . The O verbreadth D octrine .................................................................... 256 1. H istorical O rigins ........................................................................... 257 2. M odern O verbreadth ....................................................................260 B. The O verbreadth A nalysis ..................................................................... 262 1. N arrow ly Tailored ......................................................................... 263 a) The RAVE Act's Effect on First Amendment Rights .......... 264 1) DJ Perform er-Com posers ......................................................... 264 2) T he A udience ............................................................................. 265 3) Electronic M usic Prom oters ..................................................... 269 4) Association for Political Purposes ........................................... 269 2. The Compelling Government Interest ........................................ 272 3. Substantiality .................................................................................. 275 C. The Rationale of The Disorderly House Does Not Translate to the R ave Situation ......................................................................................... 276 V II. Policy C onsiderations .............................................................................. 279 A. The Federal Government Should Defer to Local Government on This Issu e .......................................................................................................... 27 9 B. The RAVE Act May Have Driven Electronic Music Concerts U nderground ........................................................................................... 280 VIII. Suggestions For Improvements ............................................................. 280 A. Tailor the Statute With Specific Definitions ........................................ 280 B. Include a Safe Harbor for Legitimate Business Owners .................... 283 IX . C onclusion ............................................................................................... 284 I. Introduction The RAVE Act' was designed to thwart use and distribution of the illegal street drug ecstasy by holding the owner of a nightclub or other venue criminally responsible for any illegal drug-related activities that occur at an electronic music2 concert held on his or her property. Congress' goal in passing the RAVE Act was to curtail ecstasy use by eliminating electronic music concerts and raves in much the same way that crack houses could be shut down: by holding the property owners liable for crack use that took place on the property. 1. See H.R. 718, 108th Cong. (2003). The acronym RAVE stands for Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy; see also S.226, 108th Cong. §§ 1-4 (2003) (enacted). 2. For lack of a better term, this Article will refer to the music found at both electronic music concerts and raves as electronic music. The music is also referred to as techno or dance music. There are also many sub-genres, the details of which are outside the scope of this Article. See generally JIMI FRITZ, RAVE CULTURE: AN INSIDER'S OVERVIEW (SmallFry Press 1999) [hereinafter FRITZ]; MIREILLE SILCoTr, RAVE AMERICA: NEW SCHOOL DANCESCAPES (ECW Press 1999). 20061 THE RAVE A(:T- A rave is, in general, a party or a concert featuring electronic music usually accompanied by dancing. While no statutory definition of a rave exists, the legislative history of the RAVE Act, as proposed in 2002, indicates that Congress was targeting two different types of raves.3 The first type of rave identified by Congress is "held in a dance club with only a handful of people in attendance. ''4 The second type of rave is "held at a temporary venue such as a warehouse, open field or empty building and has tens of thousands of people present."5 For purposes of this Article and for clarity, the former will be referred to as an electronic music concert and the latter as a rave. There is also a third type of concert Congress did not identify: a large-scale event featuring electronic music that is held in a large venue such as a sports arena or an amphitheater.6 This type of event will also be referred to in this Article as an electronic music concert, as the main difference between a rave and an electronic music concert is that a rave is usually "underground," unlicensed and unregulated; an electronic music concert is "mainstream" and held in venues that are licensed and regulated by the city7 (and sometimes state) in which the concert takes place. II. The History of Raves and Ecstasy' Use of the club drug ecstasy was popular in New York City's gay male nightclubs in the early 1980s. British disc jockeys ("DJs") and performers who visited these New York nightclubs returned to England endorsing use of the drug, and ecstasy was introduced at electronic music concerts and raves throughout England.9 The English 3. See S. 2633, 107th Cong. § 2 (2002). 4. Id. 5. Id. 6. Denver promoter Jason Bills [says] "I think it's ridiculous to assume that the sole reason I'm doing an event at the Denver Coliseum is so that people can do drugs. We do parties in convention centers and places where professional sports teams are playing, and we'd like to be held to the same standards as any other concert promoter." Jenny Eliscu, The War on Raves, ROLLING STONE, May 24, 2001, at 21-22. 7. See