The federal court of appeals says Florida laws that seek to prohibit Florida laws from occurring in proximity to minors are not only “overloaded” and “unacceptably vague,” but are likely to be unconstitutional.
On May 13, a three-judge panel from the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower federal court’s decision to issue a “broad injunction” attempting to enforce a ban on “live adult performances.”
Under a law signed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in May 2023, drug performers or people who show that they will meet a child. meaning “Adult Live Performance” – you could be punished with a $1,000 fine and potentially punished in a one year prison.
State officials may also suspend or revoke business and liquor licenses for facilities that host such performances in spaces accessible to minors.
The facility can be fined $5,000 for the initial offense and $10,000 for subsequent offenses.
Orlando, Hamburger Mary, hosting a “family-friendly” drug brunch on Sunday, said it has suspended bookings for family-friendly drug brunches due to misinformation about the content of the law, and that 20% of the restaurant’s normal profits have been lost.
Restaurants challenge the law, and despite their shows that nude is not included, the law is so widely written and overly vague that it is impossible to ensure that restaurants are in compliance with the law.
Hamburger Marys argued that the law cannot specifically define what constitutes “inviting acts” or age-appropriate material for minors of a particular age (e.g., the difference between what is suitable for children aged 11 and 5).
The law appears to leave decisions about those that violate the hands of state officials, including secretaries of the Florida Department of Business and Occupational Regulation. Melanie Griffin argues that critics bias or interpret laws that even target “family-friendly” drug events and their definitions of “sexual” content.
“There are at least three different parts of the law that are widely open to a vast number of different interpretations,” said Melissa Stewart, Hamburger Mary’s lead lawyer. Metro Weekly. “Hamburger Mary doesn’t think about their performance. It’s not suitable for children. If so, they wouldn’t let the kids go into the door. The problem is that Mary of the burger has every reason to fear that Florida thinks their drug performance is indecent for the child. ”
Stewart said many Republican lawmakers who supported the law openly stated their desire to close drug story hour events without sexual content, indicating that the nation accepts a much more stringent definition of “indecent” than a reasonable person.
Most of the 11th Circuit panels agreed heavily with Stewart’s analysis of the difficult situation in which restaurants found themselves.
“It’s true, Burger’s Mary believes that family-friendly performances don’t contain “delicious” or “sexually explicit” content,” Judge Robin Rosenbaum wrote on behalf of the majority. “But Mary of Hamburger also reveals that the drug show, like almost every show in the genre, involves performers who wear “clothes that other sex wear more conventionally.”[p]Upright chest chest. ” and point out that some people may think that “the dressed man” is a violation of the law by reading it to young children. ”
Rosenbaum said Florida has done nothing to alleviate restaurants’ fears of being unfairly targeted under a broader interpretation of the law.
“FDBR’s previous enforcement measures against other drug venues do little to alleviate the fear of reasonable speakers,” Rosenbaum wrote. “Indeed, as FDBPR claimed, these shows looked somewhat more risque than the Burger Mary show on Sunday. FDBPR’s previous enforcement action reinforces the sense of reasonable observers that when departments monitor drug shows, they are more likely to see what appears to be bewd regardless of the actual content. ”
Rosenbaum discovered that fear of being targeted by Hamburger Mary is reasonable and that the law is likely to be unconstitutional.
“The Constitution calls for singularity when the state restricts its speech,” she wrote. “Clearing speech regulations protects us from the whims of government censorship, and the need for clarity is particularly strong when the government takes the legally strong step of labeling speeches “indecent.” “I know it when I see it” test would make those who arbitrarily enforce the law with speeches unconstitutional.
“Even so, Florida Senate Bill 1438 believes “I know it when I know it” to regulate expression. The law prohibits children from entering “live performances,” which Florida deems obscene for minors.
“I think the panel’s opinion accurately reflects what burger Mary has been discussing from Jump, meaning that the law is a terrible, unconstitutional attempt to suppress and censor speeches from people the state doesn’t like,” Stewart said. Metro Weekly. “And that’s true Particularly targeting strange people and genderless people [and] Drag the performer. The panel’s decision also means that the Floridian’s initial right to amendments will be protected while the suit is terminated. ”
Stewart said the 11th Circuit’s decision applies only to U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell’s interim injunction prevents state officials from enforcing the law, not a ruling on the constitutionality of the law itself.
“We haven’t gone to trial yet,” she said.
According to the Political News website Florida politicsthe state has not said whether it will seek further examination from the entire 11th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court previously voted 6-3 in November 2023 to reject an emergency request overturning Pressnell’s injunction.
Judges Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch showed that they had immediately intervened in the case, but two Trump appointees, Judges Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, declined to overturn the injunction, warning that their decision did not reflect their views on whether the ban on drag is a constitutional one.
Nevertheless, the 11th Circuit’s decision could be suspended in other states that otherwise attempt to impose similar vague restrictions on protected speeches.
Several states with Republican-dominated Congresses have tried to pass similar laws as Florida. This limits places that restrict drug shows and punishes facilities that host such performances in places where minors may be present. As a result, these companies will be forced to choose to restrict drug show hosting or admission to individuals over the age of 18.
Source: Metro Weekly – www.metroweekly.com
