A decision preventing a company from holding an adult sex-themed event at Dallas' convention center—even after the city's own attorney warned that such a move would violate the business' free-speech rights—has been reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in a 2-1 decision.

According to the decision in Three Expo Events v. City of Dallas, Three Expo Events staged a well-attended and economically successful event called “Exxxotica 2015,” which featured near nudity and sexually suggestive activities that drew opposition from some Dallas citizens on moral and civic grounds.

Dallas' mayor acknowledged that he was concerned about the city providing a forum for the event, but he and other city officials took the position at the time that they could not legally and constitutionally deny the use of the city's convention center to Three Expo based on the content of its speech or expression.

In 2016, Three Expo was in the process of drafting another contract to hold a similar event at the convention center, but the mayor advised the media he did not want a second event, this one called Exxxotica 2016, to return to the city. Many council members supported the mayor's opposition to the event during a meeting, equating it to “the unbridled right to allow pornography to be displayed in a public facility.”

While the Dallas city attorney advised the council that the resolution preventing a second Exxxotica event at the convention center would not pass constitutional muster, the council voted to pass it anyway.

Three Expo responded by filing a complaint in a Dallas U.S. district court seeking an injunction to prevent the city from enforcing the resolution and denying Exxxotica access to the convention center. The action alleged that the city violated the business' First Amendment rights, among other claims.

The district court later ruled in favor of the city, agreeing with its argument that Three Expo lacked standing to bring the suit—a ruling the business appealed to the Fifth Circuit.

In its recent decision, the Fifth Circuit majority determined the trial court had erred in ruling that Three Expo lacked standing to seek an injunction against the city's resolution.

“The mayor and the city council made clear at the city council meeting their firm and deliberate decision to exclude Exxxotica 2016 from the convention center under any circumstance and regardless of the legal consequences,” wrote Circuit Judge James Dennis.

Dennis noted that the court also erred in agreeing with the city's “highly convoluted and meritless argument” that the resolution did not cause injury to Three Expo.

“Further, it is also clear and free from serious controversy that Three Expo's injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the city in denying it a forum for its speech events and that it is likely that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision in this case,” Dennis concluded in the decision.

Judge Jennifer Elrod filed a dissenting opinion, noting that the majority had ignored the text of the city's resolution. “It ignores the fact that the plaintiff never tried to contract with the city after the resolution was passed,” Elrod wrote. “It ignores the fact that the plaintiff, by its own admission, never even intended to contract with the city.”

Roger Albright, a Dallas attorney who represents Three Expo, said the Fifth Circuit's majority ruling was well reasoned.

“The [Fifth Circuit] was rather harsh about the defendant's argument and the court buying it. You don't see that often,'' Albright said.

“We want to enforce our First Amendment right to return to the convention center,” Albright added. “If the city would like to determine a way to return our constitutional right, our client would be willing to listen to what they city wants to put forward.''

Jim Pinson, a Dallas assistant city attorney who helped defend the case, declined to comment on the decision.