I see your point, but what about bars that charge cover fees? They are not open to the general public and should be considered private because they "screen" who gets in. Since they exercise control over the public access to the bar, shouldn't that make them "private," so that they can allow smoking (or not)? Also, would this apply to "private" country clubs with memberships? I wouldn't think so because they aren't open to the general public. Maybe a way to get around this would be to create memberships to bars in order to establish themselves as private and NOT open to the general public.Sorry, I am just really curious about this issue.
This is absolutely NOT a taking (5th Amendment issue). No taking has occured, under anybody's standard.The answer to your question of whether such an amendment is constitutional is YES. It's constitutional becasue your state has amended ITS CONSTITUTION to include it. Becasue there is no issue arising under the US constitution, that's the end of the story. The only way to get rid of the Ohio Smoking ban is to amend the Ohio constitution once again. Even if the ban somehow runs afoul of another provision of the OHIO constitution, it is still good law.