SCOTUS tosses challenge to TN law banning drag shows with kids present, state AG hails decision
Tennessee's ban on drag shows when children are present will remain in effect, as the Supreme Court earlier this week refused to hear a challenge to the law brought on by a drag performance group, a move the state's Republican attorney general heralded as "another big win for Tennessee."
The state's Adult Entertainment Act, passed in 2023, does not allow "adult-oriented performances" in public spaces, or anywhere where minors may see them.
"Free speech is a sacred American value, but the First Amendment does not require Tennessee to allow sexually explicit performances in front of children," Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in a post on X. "We will continue to defend TN's law and children."
A federal judge ruled that the law, which specifically targets drag shows, was "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad," temporarily halting enforcement. However, in July, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, asserting that the Memphis-based theater company that filed the lawsuit – Friends of George's Inc. – lacked standing to challenge the law.
Another lawsuit challenging the ban filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is still underway on behalf of Blount County Pride, another LGBTQ+ advocacy group, after then-Attorney General Ryan Desmond threatened to prosecute anyone violating the ban during the 2023 pride festival.
Fox News Digital reached out to Friends of George's Inc. and the ACLU but did not receive a response by publication time.
Violators who do not adhere to the Adult Entertainment Act could be prosecuted for a Class A misdemeanor, while a second or third offense is a Class E felony. Both could result in fines and jail time anywhere from 11 months to six years.
"I'm proud that the United States Supreme Court has upheld yet another Tennessee law protecting our children. SB 3 ensures that Tennessee children are not exposed to sexually explicit entertainment," state's Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson said in an X post. Johnson was one of the sponsors of the bill in 2023.
The Supreme Court already has another case in front of them brought by the ACLU challenging a Tennessee law prohibiting transgender medical treatments and procedures for minors.
In that case, the court is weighing whether the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, which guarantees equal treatment under the law for individuals in similar circumstances, prevents states from banning medical providers from offering puberty blockers and hormone treatments to children seeking transgender surgical procedures.
Speaking to Fox News Digital last month, Skrmetti expressed cautious optimism of a favorable outcome.
"It seems like the momentum has really shifted almost culturally on these issues. And when you see people trying to rewrite laws through creative judging, through creative regulating, that alienates the people from the laws that bind them, and it's bad for America."
"We'll know what the Supreme Court does when the Supreme Court does it," he added.
The high court is expected to rule on that case by June.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kansas court halts gender marker change restrictions
KANSAS (KSNT) – The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced in a press release that it has won a court case that barred Kansans from changing their gender markers on their driver's licenses. A Kansas state appeals court stated the Kansas Department of Revenue may resume allowing Kansans to change their gender markers on their driver's licenses, according to the ACLU. Kobach has 30 days to file an appeal in the case. 'This decision recognizes that the Attorney General failed to show any harm at all in allowing transgender Kansans the same personal autonomy, privacy, and dignity that all Kansans have,' said D.C. Hiegert, Civil Liberties legal fellow for the ACLU of Kansas. 'Being required to use a license with the wrong gender marker has already meant that transgender Kansans have been outed against their consent in their daily lives. We commend the incredible courage and sense of community our clients have had in standing up to this attack on all of our fundamental rights.' Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach filed a lawsuit in 2023 to prevent transgender people from changing their gender markers, citing the recently passed Senate Bill 180 that defined biological sex. A trial judge granted a temporary injunction in March 2024 blocking gender marker changes while the case moved forward, according to the press release from the ACLU. AG Kobach rejects Gov. Kelly's requests to join funding lawsuits The ACLU was allowed to intervene in the case in August 2023 as it raised questions about the constitutionality of SB 180, which establishes definitions of 'male' and 'female' in the state's statutes. 'The Governor has stated that SB 180 changes nothing with respect to drivers licenses and birth certificates. That is nonsense. The Legislature passed SB 180 and overrode Governor Kelly's veto specifically to ensure that those documents reflect biological sex at birth. The Governor doesn't get to veto a bill and then ignore the Legislature's override. She is violating her oath of office to uphold Kansas law. We will see her in court.' Kris Kobach, Kansas Attorney General wrote on June 29, 2023 The ACLU said the Court of Appeals didn't find that changing gender markers would impair criminal identification and that Kobach didn't have evidence to support his interpretation of S.B. 180. Kansas political divide intensifies as leaders support or condemn President Donald Trump 27 News has reached out to the Kansas Attorney General's Office for a statement on the recent court decision and will add it to this article after it is released. In the past, opponents of a gender marker ban have argued it raises privacy concerns. An example would be the employment process. People are usually required to submit proof of identity and employment authorization, including a birth certificate. If the gender listed on the birth certificate doesn't match an individual's identity, information about them being transgender may be outed. For more Kansas news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and by signing up for our news email alerts. Sign up for our Storm Track Weather app by clicking here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Moran asks federal officials to keep airspace restrictions at D.C. airport in place
U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran demanded commitments from federal officials during hearings Thursday to keep airspace safe at Reagan Washington National Airport, the site of a deadly collision in January. (Kansas Reflector screen capture of U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran's YouTube channel) TOPEKA — U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran pressed federal officials Wednesday on how they intend to ensure safety at the Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C., in the wake of a January crash between a passenger plane from Wichita and an Army helicopter that left no survivors. Moran, a Kansas Republican, questioned U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Federal Aviation Administration administrator nominee Bryan Bedford at separate committee hearings Wednesday on whether they would commit to keeping in place restrictions on non-essential helicopter flights around the D.C. airport. 'It's my understanding, from information from the Army, that since Jan. 29, seven flights have taken off and landed at the Pentagon,' Moran said to Hegseth. 'Six of those flights occurred during periods of high volume at DCA. One of those aircraft caused two different commercial flights to abort landing on May 1, and since this latest incident, I understand that all flights have been halted.' Since the January crash, Moran has pushed for aviation reforms, introducing legislation that mandates in busy airspace the use of Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast, or ADS-B, which automatically transmits an aircraft's location to nearby pilots once per second. The legislation also removes the possibility for pilots to opt out of using ADS-B. Moran introduced that legislation after close calls at the same airport where the crash took place. The Pentagon, which is less than two miles away from Reagan National as the crow flies, halted military helicopter flights near the airport. The legislation has been in a committee awaiting action since it was introduced in early May. Moran wants the flight restrictions in place until the FAA can come up with a safe route, if there is one. Hegseth, in response, said no authorization for VIP or convenience flights exists in that area. 'You have our assurance that I'm working with (Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy) very closely to make sure that the only flights that would be — even in a modified path — would be those that are necessary and are authorized,' Hegseth said. Moran sits on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, where he questioned Hegseth, and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, where he requested a commitment from Bedford to maintain safety restrictions. 'My understanding is the FAA is supreme when it comes to the control of the airspace,' Bedford said. 'But we want to be good partners with the Department of Defense, and we have protocols on how to do that — multiple protocols, as I understand.' The FAA creates military operating areas, which include restricted and prohibited spaces, and line of fire space and alert zones, and determines the airspace classifications around airports. The busiest airports, like Reagan, are Class B airspace. Bedford said the FAA can accommodate the U.S. Department of Defense's needs, but he added, 'we can't have this mixed-use traffic in Class B airspace.'
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Protesting in Michigan this weekend? These are your rights
With a Washington military parade, President Donald Trump's birthday and growing opposition to immigration raids in Los Angeles, organizers have planned protests around the country for this weekend. Protests have been a part of the United States since the founding of the country. The U.S. Constitution guarantees rights, but that doesn't always mean the police will respect them or that a court will uphold them if they're violated, according to the National Lawyers Guild's "Know Your Rights — a guide for protesters." "When you are protesting or having any interaction with law enforcement, asserting your rights does not usually mean that the police will respect your rights or change how they are treating you. However, by using your rights ... you can make it harder for police to use your own statements or anything found on you during a search as evidence against you during a trial." Public property. No permit is necessary to march on public sidewalks, as long as car and pedestrian traffic is not obstructed, according to the ACLU of Michigan. Police may ask demonstrators without a permit to move to the side of a sidewalk to let people pass or for other safety reasons. According to the ACLU, the rights of protesters and organizers are strongest in "traditional public forums," such as streets, sidewalks and parks. People have the right to speak out in front of government buildings as long as they are not blocking access or interfering with operations. The rules for speech on private property are determined by the property owner. Counter-protesters also have the right to be present and voice displeasure within the vicinity of a different group, although they do not have a right to physically disrupt an event or drown out the speakers they are protesting, according to the ACLU. Some Michigan cities, including Detroit, Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids, ask large gatherings that have the potential to obstruct traffic obtain a permit with up to 70 days' notice. The National Lawyers Guild recommends trying to end law enforcement interaction as quickly as possible, as well as stating your rights out loud when asked questions. 'If a cop is speaking to you on the street, ask: 'Am I free to go?' If they say yes, you should leave, if you can do that safely. "If the cop says anything other than yes, follow up with: 'Am I being detained?' If they say anything other than yes, then say that you do not want to talk further and leave immediately,' according to NLG's Know Your Rights guide. If a police officer asks a question, a protester does not have to answer and can let the officer know they will remain silent and want to speak to a lawyer. Statements you make to people who are not police can be held against you, according to the NLG. In Michigan, police cannot ask you to provide your name or other identity information unless you have been detained on reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime. This right is not the same in every state. Police are allowed to pat down the outside of your clothing without consent, but they need your permission or a warrant to search beyond that, according to NLG's guide. To decline a search, the guide recommends using the standard legal phrasing, 'I do not consent.' Michigan's ACLU recommends asking for a lawyer immediately, remaining silent and not signing or agreeing to anything without a lawyer. If a defendant hasn't hired a lawyer, they can ask for a court-appointed public defender if they can't afford it, according to Michigan Legal Help from the Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan State Bar Association. If you are arrested, you will be searched as part of the arrest process, according to NLG. Police officers may lie to you about having evidence, deals to drop charges, overstating penalties for crimes, the timeline of your detention, and whether they are recording, according to the guide. Lying to a government agent is sometimes a criminal offence, while remaining silent until speaking to a lawyer is not, according to the NLG. When in a public space, people have the right to photograph anything in plain view, including federal buildings and police, according to Michigan's ACLU. On private property, property owners may set their own rules. Police may not confiscate or demand to view photos or videos without a warrant. They may not delete data under any circumstances, according to the ACLU. Police may order citizens to stop recording if they are "truly interfering with legitimate law enforcement operations, but video recording from a safe distance is not interfering," according to the ACLU. [ Help us make the Free Press better for you. ] According to Michigan's ACLU, police may not disperse a protest unless there is "clear danger of a riot, disorder, interference with traffic, or other immediate threat to public safety." "Protesters must receive a clear and detailed notice of a dispersal order, including how much time they have to disperse, consequences for failing to disperse, and what exit route they can follow before they may be arrested or charged with any crime," according to the ACLU. Officers must give "reasonable opportunity to comply, including sufficient time and a clear exit path," according to the ACLU. The ACLU of Michigan recommends getting contact information of witnesses, taking photos of injuries, and writing down everything you can remember, including officers' names, badge and patrol car numbers. With this information, you can file a written complaint to a civilian complaint board, police department or agency, according to the ACLU. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Protest rights in Michigan: What to know ahead of No Kings events
