LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A northern Kentucky county can impose strict rules governing how much communication strippers may have with potential customers, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday.

The court, however, ordered a federal judge to consider a challenge to the license fees the clubs and dancers must pay under the ordinance. The three-judge panel said there wasn't enough information yet to decide whether those are constitutional.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled that Kenton County's ordinance is constitutional and doesn't violate the First Amendment rights of exotic dancers. The three-judge panel, in a split decision, said the county wrote the ordinance to prevent prostitution.

That's a legitimate secondary purpose in regulating sexually oriented businesses, the court ruled in 729, Inc. v. Kenton County Fiscal Court.

"In other words, the county has targeted contact between adult entertainers and customers that created a risk of prostitution," Chief Judge Danny Boggs wrote.

Judge Eric Clay disagreed, in part, with the decision.

Clay, in a four-page dissent, said while the county does have a legitimate interest in stopping prostitution, the ordinance went too far and infringed on the free-speech rights of customers and dancers.

"Regardless of whether entertainers and customers wish to continue to develop the erotic fantasy created on stage or whether they wish to talk about an upcoming political election or any other topic, (the ordinance) severely limits their ability to do so," Clay wrote.

Kenton County was the first northern Kentucky government to adopt the ordinance, which imposes regulations on all types of sexually oriented business, including strip clubs, escort services and adult bookstores. Under the ordinance, dancers are required to stay at least 5 feet from patrons and could have almost no conversation with potential customers.

A group of clubs and dancers challenged the ordinance, saying it violated their free-speech rights.

In the lawsuit, the clubs contended that the county's ordinance was an impermissible prohibition of free expression, that the ordinance holds clubs liable for the actions of employees and patrons and permits unreasonable, warrantless searches.

The appeals court rejected challenges by 729 Inc., Foxx Restaurants Inc., the Venus Lounge and three dancers who claimed the ordinance violated the First Amendment.

The clubs and dancers said that the ordinance barred entertainers from entering areas of the club where patrons were within an hour of performing seminude on stage and did not provide meaningful judicial review of any citations issued for violating the ordinance.