Federal judge rules Tennessee restrictions on drag shows unconstitutional

[Blkfyre]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4033015-federal-judge-rules-tennessee-restrictions-on-drag-shows-unconstitutional/

A federal judge ruled Friday that a Tennessee law banning drag shows in public or in places where children could view them is unconstitutional, finding that it violates freedom of speech protections.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker said in his ruling that the law, which Gov. Bill Lee (R) signed in March, is both "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad."

The law says an "adult cabaret performance" is unlawful if it happens on public property or in a location where the performance "could be viewed by a person who is not an adult." It defines such a performance as one that is harmful to minors and includes topless dancers, "exotic" dancers, strippers and male or female impersonators.

Parker had issued a preliminary injunction at the end of March to block the law from taking effect. He agreed with Friends of George's, a Memphis-based theater group that produces drag performances, comedy sketches and plays, that the state's Adult Entertainment Act (AEA) could apply "just about anywhere."

Friends of George's argued that the law would violate its free speech and put its members at risk of felony charges over the shows that it has held for years. The group argued that the law is overly broad because it applies to minors of all ages and anywhere that a minor could be.

Parker agreed with the argument, ruling that the AEA was passed "for the impermissible purpose of chilling constitutionally-protected speech."

He ruled that the state has a compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of minors, but the law is not the least restrictive nor most narrowly tailored way that it could accomplish this without violating free speech.

[Bande]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4033015-federal-judge-rules-tennessee-restrictions-on-drag-shows-unconstitutional/

A federal judge ruled Friday that a Tennessee law banning drag shows in public or in places where children could view them is unconstitutional, finding that it violates freedom of speech protections.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker said in his ruling that the law, which Gov. Bill Lee (R) signed in March, is both "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad."

The law says an "adult cabaret performance" is unlawful if it happens on public property or in a location where the performance "could be viewed by a person who is not an adult." It defines such a performance as one that is harmful to minors and includes topless dancers, "exotic" dancers, strippers and male or female impersonators.

Parker had issued a preliminary injunction at the end of March to block the law from taking effect. He agreed with Friends of George's, a Memphis-based theater group that produces drag performances, comedy sketches and plays, that the state's Adult Entertainment Act (AEA) could apply "just about anywhere."

Friends of George's argued that the law would violate its free speech and put its members at risk of felony charges over the shows that it has held for years. The group argued that the law is overly broad because it applies to minors of all ages and anywhere that a minor could be.

Parker agreed with the argument, ruling that the AEA was passed "for the impermissible purpose of chilling constitutionally-protected speech."

He ruled that the state has a compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of minors, but the law is not the least restrictive nor most narrowly tailored way that it could accomplish this without violating free speech.

Very simple, rewrite the rule of law on adult content, just like movies and such and you are set.
A responsible parent would not allow a child to attend a event like this..

[bats]

A responsible parent would not allow a child to attend a event like this..

What do you presume goes on at an "event like this?" If there's nothing overtly sexual or obscene, what would be irresponsible about allowing children to attend?

[Blkfyre]

Very simple, rewrite the rule of law on adult content, just like movies and such and you are set.
A responsible parent would not allow a child to attend a event like this..

Whether they attend or not, is none of your business. They are the parents, not you. Conservatives want to say liberals have no say how they bring up their children, shouldn't the same apply the other way?

[dogwalker]

shouldn't the same apply the other way?

I  love that line.  I use similar statements on certain people.
I call it a "demonstration." 
Do the same to others and see how they like it. 
They usually don't and learn real fast (sometimes) the error in their behavior or thoughts.
 

[bladegunner]

fearless soldiers fought on beaches 78 years ago. They could define a woman i bet till this day.

[bats]

fearless soldiers fought on beaches 78 years ago. They could define a woman i bet till this day.

Seventy-eight years ago, plenty of LGBTQ people existed, but almost all stayed closeted because it wasn't safe. And if the MAGA crowd had its way, that's how things would be today.

[Blkfyre]

fearless soldiers fought on beaches 78 years ago. They could define a woman i bet till this day.

They fought in those beaches so people could have the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So if someone is made happy while living their life with the sexuality they believe they are, wouldn't those people who fought be proud?

[bladegunner]

naturally hopefully. with the capabilites to define a female.

[Romanticlover]

Seventy-eight years ago, plenty of LGBTQ people existed, but almost all stayed closeted because it wasn't safe. And if the MAGA crowd had its way, that's how things would be today.

What people do in their homes is their business as long as they are consenting adults, most Americans want it to stay behind closed doors instead of brainwashing children in schools and libraries.

Having said that, I agree with the judge because that law is too vague the way it was written.

[bats]

What people do in their homes is their business as long as they are consenting adults, most Americans want it to stay behind closed doors instead of brainwashing children in schools and libraries. 

This sounds like something we'd hear from someone on Fox News. They always claim to speak for "Americans" as if right-wingers are the only true Americans. It's absurd.

[Blkfyre]

What people do in their homes is their business as long as they are consenting adults, most Americans want it to stay behind closed doors instead of brainwashing children in schools and libraries.

Having said that, I agree with the judge because that law is too vague the way it was written.

So you think just talking about it is brainwashing huh?

[Romanticlover]

So you think just talking about it is brainwashing huh?

Yes if an adult is talking about it to children.

[Romanticlover]

In California it's mandatory that public schools teach LGTBQ studies and parents don't have a say in the matter and they can't opt-out their children which I think is wrong, parents have a right to know what their children are being taught in school.

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/fights-break-out-amid-glendale-school-board-meeting-on-pride-curriculum/


"Bringing in curriculum for K-6 on gender ideology, that is what we're against," said Any Torosyan, a Glendale parent opposing the curriculum. Torosyan believes money should be spent focusing on improving students' testing scores instead.

[Blkfyre]

Yes if an adult is talking about it to children.

So that means talking about the bible is brainwashing too? How about talking about heterosexual relationships? Should those be removed from all school curriculums?