Exotic dancing laws too broad

12 November, 2005 by dturner

Federal judge rules state provisions violate free expression

Associated Press


GREENSBORO - Some provisions of a state law regulating erotic dancing are so broad they are unconstitutional, a federal judge has ruled.

"The General Assembly could easily have drafted a statute that is less invasive of free speech interests," U.S. District Judge N. Carlton Tilley wrote.

The ruling is the latest in a five-year legal battle over the enforcement of the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control law on sexually explicit conduct. The law applies to clubs with an ABC permit.

A Greensboro strip club, Christie's Caberet, challenged the law with a lawsuit in January 2001 after officials said employees violated the regulations. The club would have faced a 30-day suspension of its permit.

Tilley found the law unconstitutional and the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Richmond, Va., upheld the order in 2002.

The General Assembly then revised the law in 2003, but lawmakers kept parts that prevented conduct that simulates sex acts or the fondling of one's private parts, including the posterior.

The Greensboro club renewed its complaint in federal court and Tilley released his opinion a year after the 2004 trial.

Tilley found the provisions in the law went too far in prohibiting protected expression. In his Oct. 26 opinion, he wrote any owner of an ABC-licensed business would be in violation even if a fully clothed person gave the appearance of having sex while dancing.

"The breadth of this statute would even reach the owners of Bank of America Stadium who permit the Carolina Panther (sic) cheerleaders, the Topcats (sic), to perform dances incorporating movements that, even momentarily, could be interpreted as `simulat(ing) sexual intercourse,' " Tilley wrote. "When their cheers involved `handling or touching in a loving way' their own buttocks, they would be in violation of the statute."

Coliseums or arenas that book acts such as Britney Spears or Madonna also could be in violation based on the dance movements of the performers or their dancers, he added. The same would apply to clubs or bars, he wrote. "The prohibitions would likewise apply to fully clothed customers wishing to do the shag or other popular dances such as those seen on the TV show Soul Train or the movies Dirty Dancing or Saturday Night Fever," Tilley wrote.

The state plans to appeal Tilley's rulings, said Fred Gregory, the state ABC commission's chief counsel, while a lawyer for Christie's said the ruling was well-reasoned.

"It's a resounding victory for freedom of expression," said Michael Murray, based in Cleveland.

Tilley did not strike down an anti-nudity provision that says people who expose their genitals violate the law.