Latest news with #ProtectionofChildren
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal appeals court bocks Florida's drag show law over First Amendment concerns
The Brief A federal court upheld an injunction against a 2023 Florida law targeting children's attendance at drag shows, calling it overly broad and vague. Judges ruled the law violated the First Amendment by failing to define prohibited conduct clearly. The case stemmed from a suit by Hamburger Mary's, a venue known for family-friendly drag events. What we know ORLANDO, Fla. - A federal appeals court has upheld a preliminary injunction blocking Florida's 2023 law that aimed to prevent children from attending drag performances. In a 2-1 ruling, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Hamburger Mary's, an Orlando-area venue that challenged the law on First Amendment grounds. The court determined the law, known as Senate Bill 1438, is "substantially overbroad" and violates constitutional free speech protections by lacking specificity in its restrictions. What we don't know The future of the law remains uncertain, as it could be subject to further legal challenges or appeals to higher courts. Additionally, it is unclear whether the state legislature will attempt to revise the law's language or whether the Florida Supreme Court will be asked to weigh in on the interpretation of ambiguous terms like "lewd conduct." Judge Gerald Tjoflat, the dissenting voice in the ruling, urged that course of action instead of invalidating the law outright. The backstory SB 1438, dubbed the "Protection of Children" bill by its Republican sponsors, was part of a broader wave of legislation in Florida and other states targeting drag shows and transgender-related issues. Though it does not explicitly mention drag performances, the law emerged after Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration took enforcement action against venues that hosted drag shows attended by children. Hamburger Mary's, known for its family-friendly drag events, filed a lawsuit arguing that the law posed an existential threat to its operations. What they're saying Tuesday's majority opinion said that "by providing only vague guidance as to which performances it prohibits, the act (the law) wields a shotgun when the First Amendment allows a scalpel at most." "The Constitution demands specificity when the state restricts speech," said the 81-page majority opinion, written by Judge Robin Rosenbaum and joined by Judge Nancy Abudu. "Requiring clarity in speech regulations shields us from the whims of government censors. And the need for clarity is especially strong when the government takes the legally potent step of labeling speech 'obscene.' An 'I know it when I see it' test would unconstitutionally empower those who would limit speech to arbitrarily enforce the law. But the First Amendment empowers speakers instead. Yet Florida's Senate Bill 1438 (the law) takes an 'I know it when I see it' approach to regulating expression." But Judge Gerald Tjoflat, in a 45-page dissent, said the majority "reads the statute in the broadest possible way, maximizes constitutional conflict and strikes the law down wholesale." He argued that the federal court should have sent the case to the Florida Supreme Court for help in interpreting the law — a step known as "certifying" a question to the state court. "Instead, the majority sidesteps the very tools our system provides — tools designed to respect state authority, foster comity, and avoid unnecessary constitutional rulings," Tjoflat wrote. "By casting aside those safeguards, today's decision stretches this court beyond its proper role and departs from the humility and restraint that federal courts owe when state law is in question." The law, dubbed by sponsors the "Protection of Children" bill, sought to prevent venues from admitting children to adult live performances. What's next Hamburger Mary's was located in Orlando at the time it filed the lawsuit but later announced plans to move to Kissimmee. An opening date has not yet been finalized. STAY CONNECTED WITH FOX 35 ORLANDO: Download the FOX Local app for breaking news alerts, the latest news headlines Download the FOX 35 Storm Team Weather app for weather alerts & radar Sign up for FOX 35's daily newsletter for the latest morning headlines FOX Local:Stream FOX 35 newscasts, FOX 35 News+, Central Florida Eats on your smart TV The Source This story was written based on information shared by The News Service of Florida.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal Appeals Court rules against ‘Drag Show' law
Describing the law as 'substantially overbroad,' a federal appeals court Tuesday upheld a preliminary injunction blocking a 2023 Florida law aimed at preventing children from attending drag shows. A panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, backed the Central Florida venue Hamburger Mary's in a First Amendment challenge to the law. The state appealed in 2023 after U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell issued a preliminary injunction. Tuesday's majority opinion said that 'by providing only vague guidance as to which performances it prohibits, the act (the law) wields a shotgun when the First Amendment allows a scalpel at most.' 'The Constitution demands specificity when the state restricts speech,' said the 81-page majority opinion, written by Judge Robin Rosenbaum and joined by Judge Nancy Abudu. 'Requiring clarity in speech regulations shields us from the whims of government censors. And the need for clarity is especially strong when the government takes the legally potent step of labeling speech 'obscene.' An 'I know it when I see it' test would unconstitutionally empower those who would limit speech to arbitrarily enforce the law. But the First Amendment empowers speakers instead. Yet Florida's Senate Bill 1438 (the law) takes an 'I know it when I see it' approach to regulating expression.' But Judge Gerald Tjoflat, in a 45-page dissent, said the majority 'reads the statute in the broadest possible way, maximizes constitutional conflict and strikes the law down wholesale.' He argued that the federal court should have sent the case to the Florida Supreme Court for help in interpreting the law — a step known as 'certifying' a question to the state court. 'Instead, the majority sidesteps the very tools our system provides — tools designed to respect state authority, foster comity, and avoid unnecessary constitutional rulings,' Tjoflat wrote. 'By casting aside those safeguards, today's decision stretches this court beyond its proper role and departs from the humility and restraint that federal courts owe when state law is in question.' The law, dubbed by sponsors the 'Protection of Children' bill, sought to prevent venues from admitting children to adult live performances. It defines adult live performances as 'any show, exhibition, or other presentation that is performed in front of a live audience, which, in whole or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or specific sexual activities, … lewd conduct, or the lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts.' It would allow regulators to suspend or revoke licenses of restaurants, bars and other venues that violate the law. Also, it would prohibit local governments from issuing public permits for events that could expose children to the targeted behavior. While the law does not specifically mention drag shows, it came after Gov. Ron DeSantis'administration cracked down on venues in South Florida and Central Florida where children attended drag shows. It also came amid a series of controversial laws passed by Republicans in Florida and other states about transgender-related issues. Tuesday's majority opinion focused, in part, on the use of the words 'lewd conduct' in the law. It said the term is overbroad and that Rosenbaum and Abudu 'understand the act's prohibition on depictions of lewd conduct to reach speech that is constitutionally protected, even as to minors.' 'The result is that venues like Hamburger Mary's are prone to restrict minors from consuming speech that they are within their constitutional rights to access,' the majority opinion said. 'Not only that, but the act's sweep risks indirectly squelching adults' access to nonobscene speech.' Tjoflat, however, wrote that the law's 'enumeration of terms is not perfectly sorted by specificity, but its ordering still lends credence to the idea that 'lewd conduct' was intended merely as a catchall phrase, rather than a significant expansion of the statute's scope.' 'Simply put, the question before us is not whether (the law) is stylishly and elegantly written,' Tjoflat wrote. 'The question is whether the statute violates the Constitution, and our review requires us to engage with the statutory text, as written, in good faith and with the presumption that the Legislature did not intend to infringe on constitutional rights. By applying the aforementioned principles and reading the statute harmoniously, we can and should conclude that the statute reaches only speech that would be considered obscene (under a U.S. Supreme Court precedent).' Hamburger Mary's was located in Orlando at the time it filed the lawsuit but later announced plans to move to Kissimmee. It said in 2023 that it had run 'family friendly' drag shows for 15 years. Tuesday's majority opinion said the fact that Hamburger Mary's left the Orlando location after filing the challenge did not make the lawsuit moot. It said in 'cases involving businesses that pause operations but may resume them, courts take a common-sense approach to evaluating mootness.' Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
The Hindu
06-05-2025
- The Hindu
Over 50 offenders nabbed by Hyderabad She Teams for misbehaviour
Hyderabad She Teams arrested many offenders involved in a series of recent cases including blackmail, harassment, and exploitation of women and minors. In one case, a 30-year-old private employee was arrested after blackmailing a woman using secretly recorded intimate videos. The accused befriended the woman via Facebook and lured her to a hotel room, where he covertly recorded videos without her consent. He later threatened to release the footage unless she agreed to one of three demands: meeting him on call, arranging another woman, or paying ₹1 lakh in cash. Instead, the woman approached She Teams, who promptly arrested the man at his residence. Upon confession, he was sentenced to three days of simple imprisonment following the registration of a petty case at the victim's request. In a separate incident, a 34-year-old plumber from Begumpet was booked for blackmailing his neighbour. The man allegedly recorded a private moment while the complainant was celebrating an occasion with her colleagues. The following day, he trespassed into her house and used the footage to coerce her into a physical relationship, threatening to release the video online. The accused was arrested and sentenced to four days of simple imprisonment. The team also uncovered a false complaint filed by a woman near Secunderabad railway station. She alleged sexual assault by an unknown person and requested police intervention. However, investigations revealed that the woman is a habitual offender who targets police officers by gaining access to their mobile phones and sending obscene material, later demanding money through blackmail. A case was booked against her at Gopalapuram police station. In another instance, a GHMC vehicle driver was caught making indecent gestures towards women who come to dispose of garbage. Acting on a complaint, She Teams conducted a decoy operation and arrested the accused. He was sentenced to three days of simple imprisonment for public misconduct. Additionally, three separate Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) cases were registered at Chatrinaka, Jubilee Hills, and Madannapet police stations against individuals who manipulated minor girls with false promises of love and marriage. The accused engaged in physical relationships and later resorted to blackmail for continued exploitation. Investigations are underway. In addition, 49 individuals were caught misbehaving with women at various public places across Hyderabad. Of these, 30 were issued warnings and counseled in the presence of their family members, while two individuals were produced before the court and sentenced to two days of imprisonment along with a fine of ₹50. The She Teams urged citizens to report incidents by dialing 100 or messaging the She Teams helpline via WhatsApp on 9490616555. All reports are handled confidentially, and prompt action is assured, it said.
New Indian Express
23-04-2025
- New Indian Express
Quack arrested for selling five-day-old baby for Rs 2 lakh in Vadalur; infant rescued
CUDDALORE: A 67-year-old woman quack from Vadalur was arrested by Chidambaram Taluk police on Monday evening for allegedly selling a five-day-old baby for Rs 2 lakh. The Cuddalore District Child Protection Unit rescued the baby and took it into custody. According to sources, a woman residing in Sokkanaathanpettai village near Chidambaram was found with a five-day-old baby. Locals informed the Childline organisation in Cuddalore on Saturday, following which an inquiry was initiated. The investigation revealed that the baby had been sold to the woman by a relative for Rs 2 lakh. Following this, the District Child Protection Unit rescued the baby and shifted it to Cuddalore. A complaint was lodged by Chitradevi, a field officer with the Unit, at the Chidambaram Taluk police station. Based on the complaint, police arrested K Sathyapriya (67) of Vadalur, who operated Gokulam Medical Home without the necessary qualifications. Police said she was impersonating as an allopathic doctor and performed illegal abortions and deliveries for underage girls and women who conceived before marriage. 'She performed illegal abortions and delivered babies for underage girls and women who got pregnant before marriage. After brainwashing the mothers and relatives, she used to sell the babies to the couples without children for money,' said police. Officials confirmed that the baby sold to the woman in Sokkanaathanpettai was one such case. Based on information from police, health and family welfare department officials inspected Gokulam Medical Home and sealed the premises after seizing medicines and equipment on Monday. Police sources said, 'Earlier she was booked under Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, for the offence of selling or procuring children for any purpose, and later Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for cheating and Section 15(C) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, were included against her.' Police also said that though she claimed to be a Siddha doctor, she had previously worked as a helper in a private hospital at Vadalur and used that experience to run a medical home and pose as an allopathic doctor. Sathyapriya was produced before the Chidambaram court and remanded in judicial custody on Monday night.
The Independent
11-03-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Oxford chancellor calls for tighter controls on smartphones for children – and urges ministers to stand up to tech giants
William Hague has called for tighter controls on children's smartphone usage while urging ministers to stand up to tech giants. The Oxford chancellor said the government was wrong to water down proposals by Labour MP Josh MacAlister to introduce stronger controls for teenagers on the internet, including raising the age of 'internet adulthood' from 13 to 16, banning smartphones in schools, giving Ofcom more powers and changing the way phones are advertised to children. 'Study after study has shown that the more time young people spend on social media, the more they suffer anxiety and depression, are victims of harassment, endure poor sleep, low self-esteem and poor body image. 'Incredibly, a quarter of children as young as three and four years old are now in possession of a smartphone,' said Mr Hague. Writing in The Times, the former Tory leader asked: 'Why have they flinched on this? Why are they diluting to near insignificance a measure for which so many parents, and indeed young people themselves, have been calling?' He argued that not only are ministers 'slow to adjust to radical changes in technology and society', but they are also afraid of upsetting US president Donald Trump, who is closely allied with Tech billionaire Elon Musk. Issuing a stark warning to the government, Mr Hague said that 'welcoming technology firms is different from letting them do anything they like'. He urged ministers to 'act faster and do much better than the craven weakness they displayed last week'. Mr Hague's warning comes after the new CEO of the NSPCC told The Independent about new horrors facing children online, including one account of how a scammer used AI to paste a teenage boy's face onto a naked body before extorting him for cash. In his first interview as CEO of the leading children's charity, Chris Sherwood warned that the threat from generative AI could be worse for children than the impact of social media. Meanwhile, Childline, the helpline run by the NSPCC, has reported seeing young people increasingly mentioning AI abuse in their counselling sessions. Last year, the operator recorded 178 counselling sessions with mentions of AI-related phrases, new data reveals. It comes just days after the government was accused of 'betraying our children and capitulating to big tech' after Mr MacAlister's bill was watered down to gain government support. The version of the Bill introduced by the MP would instruct UK chief medical officers to publish advice for parents on the use of smartphones and social media by children. It would also compel ministers to say within a year whether they plan to raise the age at which children can consent for their data to be shared without parental permission. Conservative former education secretary Kit Malthouse described the Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill, as a 'hollowed-out gesture' before its consideration was adjourned. He told MPs he lamented 'the gutting of what could have been a landmark Bill' and the government 'has dithered, diluted and capitulated'. He said: 'We should all be furious about this. We should all be furious about the delay and the prevarication that is being injected into what could have been a huge step forward for parents and children. 'I cannot then understand why the government has pressured [Josh MacAlister] to produce what is, frankly, a cosmetic plug, betraying our children and capitulating to big tech. 'I'm afraid this Bill is a shell of what it could have been, and as a result, is yet another missed opportunity to improve the lives of our young people.'
