Last year, a Tennessee law was overturned for being overly vague. The law banned performances featuring strippers or men dressed as women in locations where children could view them. The State of Tennessee appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which came to a very different conclusion.
The drag queens who sued to overturn the law as unconstitutional didn’t have standing. The appeals court panel reversed that ruling, finding that Friends of George’s has not provided evidence that it intended to violate the law..”
Even if the organization alleged it intended to violate the law, it would need to show that a constitutional interest would be affected, according to the ruling.
According to the court, there is no constitutional interest in exposing children to indecent material, and the law does not prohibit the expression to adults. It reminds us to ask this question. If you can perform for adults and no one gives a hoot, why do you so desperately feel the urge to perform for children? The obvious answer is they love children, and you can’t help who you love (also not true).
And drag queens don’t grow on trees. You have to cultivate the lifestyle, groom them, or recruit them like Amway. The State of Tennessee didn’t think it appropriate for children to be exposed to burlesque, a very sensible position with many historical and cultural precedents.
“As a state overflowing with world-class artists and musicians, Tennessee respects the right to free expression. But as the court noted, Tennessee’s ‘harmful to minors’ standard is constitutionally sound and Tennessee can absolutely prohibit the exhibition of obscene material to children,” he said. “The court of appeals focused on what the law actually says and ordered the case dismissed.”
Friends of George’s, George’s queens, are considering their legal options. They continue to insist that drag shows are constitutionally protected speech. But that is not the question. It is whether the State’s interest in protecting children from material it deems unsuitable or inappropriate permits this narrow prohibition. The Sixth Circuit says yes. History and culture say yes. But times, they do change.
