Opinion No.
Background
- Saline County has an existing nighttime juvenile curfew and considers a daytime version.
- Senator Shane Broadway asked three questions about county authority, constitutional issues, and enforcement within cities.
- The Attorney General's opinion affirms county authority to enact curfews, including possibly daytime curfews, but cautions about constitutional challenges and limits when cities are involved.
- The opinion states counties may exercise police power, but this power is not unlimited and must align with statutes like A.C.A. §§ 14-14-805 to -809 and constitutional limits.
- A daytime curfew could implicate school-attendance and general-state-law constraints, creating potential challenges under A.C.A. § 14-14-805(3) and (13).
- Absent a municipality's consent, the opinion concludes a county can enforce its curfew only in unincorporated areas.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counties have authority to enact juvenile curfews | County has broad police power to promote peace and order. | Authority is bounded by constitutional and statutory limits like 14-14-805/13. | County has authority to enact curfews at night and possibly during the day, subject to limits. |
| Constitutionality of a proposed daytime curfew | Courts have often upheld curfews; generalized precedent supports validity. | Constitutionality is unsettled; no binding Arkansas precedent; challenging factors exist. | Constitutionality uncertain; presumption of validity applies until proven otherwise. |
| Whether the county can enforce its curfew inside city limits without city consent | County authority may extend into municipalities. | Within municipalities, authority is limited and consent is typically required; otherwise conflicts arise. | Absent municipal consent, the county may enforce only in unincorporated areas. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mears v. Little Rock Sch. Dist., 268 Ark. 30 (1980) (truancy/education-related limits on local authority)
- Kollmeyer v. Greer, 267 Ark. 632 (1980) (local fees vs. state-wide regulation; preemption principle)
- Town of Dyess v. Williams, 247 Ark. 155 (1969) (local ordinances must be reasonably tailored to objectives)
- White County v. City of Judsonia, 369 Ark. 151 (2007) (limits on county action within municipal boundaries)
- Harrahill v. City of Monrovia, 104 Cal. App. 4th 761 (2002) (California daytime curfew case; police-power rationale)
- Schleifer v. City of Charlottesville, 159 F.3d 843 (4th Cir. 1998) (split circuit on constitutional challenges to curfews)
- Nunez v. City of San Diego, 114 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 1997) (curfew challenges; varying outcomes by circuit)
- In reKnight, 55 Cal. App. 511 (1999) (intergovernmental limitation on local authority within municipalities)