LMP Services, Inc. v. City of Chicago, 2019 IL 123123

In 2012 Chicago amended its mobile food vehicle rules, keeping a longstanding 200-foot proximity ban preventing food trucks from parking within 200 feet of a ground-floor restaurant entrance and adding a provision requiring permanently installed GPS devices transmitting real-time location to a service with a public API.
Ordinance 2012-4489 also raised fines for violations and created designated mobile food vehicle stands where the 200-foot rule does not apply.
LMP Services, a food-truck operator, sued, challenging the 200-foot rule as violating substantive due process and equal protection (protectionism) and challenging the GPS requirement as an unreasonable warrantless search under article I, section 6 of the Illinois Constitution.
The trial court granted summary judgment to the City, holding the 200-foot rule rationally related to legitimate municipal interests and the GPS requirement lawful (not a search, or reasonable if it is one). The appellate court affirmed, and the Illinois Supreme Court granted review.
The Supreme Court affirmed: the 200-foot rule survives rational-basis review as part of a regulatory scheme promoting neighborhood stability and economic growth; the GPS requirement does not constitute an unreasonable search and, even if it did, passes the Burger closely-regulated-business standard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
200-foot proximity restriction (Chicago Muni. Code §7-38-115(f)) — substantive due process / protectionism	Rule unlawfully favors brick-and-mortar restaurants and arbitrarily restricts LMP's right to pursue a trade; protectionist motive shown by legislative statements	Ordinance rationally advances legitimate municipal interests (neighborhood stability, economic growth, sanitation); rule balanced by designated stands where trucks may operate	Upheld: not a violation of substantive due process; passes rational-basis review as rationally related to legitimate municipal interests
GPS installation and real-time location transmission (Chicago Muni. Code §7-38-115(l)) — search/privacy	Mandated permanent GPS on license condition is a warrantless, continuous search (Jones/Katz frameworks); long-term location records invade privacy	Requirement is a licensure condition for a closely regulated industry, provides necessary means for inspections and public-health response; data not automatically public and City seeks data only under narrow circumstances	Upheld: court finds no search under the record; even assuming a search, it is reasonable under closely regulated-business test (Burger)

New York v. Burger, 482 U.S. 691 (warrantless inspections of closely regulated businesses may be reasonable if three-part test is satisfied)
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (physical attachment of GPS to vehicle and long-term tracking may constitute a search)
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (reasonable expectation of privacy test for searches)
Triple A Services, Inc. v. Rice, 131 Ill. 2d 217 (upholding Chicago regulation restricting food trucks in a medical district; streets subject to city regulation)
Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Village of Lombard, 19 Ill. 2d 98 (invalidating an arbitrary proximity restriction lacking a rational basis)
Napleton v. Village of Hinsdale, 229 Ill. 2d 296 (statutes and municipal ordinances presumed constitutional; standard of review)