U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker has ruled that the Tennessee law that bans “adult cabaret performances” is unconstitutional.
In March, Friends of George’s, an LGBTQ theater company at the Evergreen Theatre, filed a suit against the state of Tennessee regarding what they called the “reckless anti-drag law.” The law was temporarily blocked shortly after, as it was set to go into effect on April 1st.
Parker granted a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against District Attorney Steve Mulroy, the state of Tennessee, Governor Bill Lee, and Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.
The Friends of George’s suit stated the law violated the group’s First Amendment rights and argued the statute is unconstitutional.
“After considering the briefs and evidence presented at trial, the Court finds that — despite Tennessee’s compelling interest in protecting the psychological and physical wellbeing of children — the Adult Entertainment Act (“AEA”) is an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech and permanently enjoins Defendant Steven Mulroy from enforcing the unconstitutional statute,” said court documents.
The court stated that not only is the AEA “unconstitutionally vague” but is “substantially overbroad,” specifically in its language regarding what is “harmful to minors.”
The law defined adult cabaret performances as those that feature “topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, and male or female impersonators.” It also stated that these performances were “harmful to minors.” The law made “adult cabaret performances” on public property or “in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult” a criminal offense.
The Tennessee General Assembly defined “harmful to minors” as “that quality of any description or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse when the matter or performance would be found by the average person applying contemporary community standards to appeal predominantly to the prurient, shameful or morbid interests of minors.”
“The AEA’s ‘harmful to minors’ standard applies to minors of all ages so it fails to provide fair notice of what is prohibited, and it encourages discriminatory enforcement. The AEA is substantially overbroad because it applies to public property or ‘anywhere’ a minor could be present,” said the ruling.