Federal Judge Overturns Tennessee Law Restricting Drag Shows: ‘Unconstitutionally Vague’

Late on Friday, a federal judge deemed Tennessee’s stringent law regulating drag shows as “unconstitutionally vague.” This decision, which involves a law unique in the nation, comes from the bench of U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker.

This law, unprecedented in its scope, sought to impose a ban on cabaret performances occurring in public places or anywhere children might be present.

However, Judge Parker, appointed under President Trump, identified it as “overly broad,” suggesting it promoted “discriminatory enforcement,” and declared it a breach of the First Amendment rights of the performers.

As Judge Parker articulated in his ruling, “There is no question that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. But there is a difference between material that is ‘obscene’ in the vernacular, and material that is ‘obscene’ under the law.”

He further clarified, “Simply put, no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit — but not obscene — speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech.”

JUST IN: Federal judge strikes down Tennessee drag queen law. Children will now be allowed to attend sexually explicit shows where they can be groomed by men in dresses.

— toddstarnes (@toddstarnes) June 3, 2023

The LGBTQ theater company, Friends of George’s, who focus on “drag-centric performances, comedy sketches, and plays” with no age restrictions, challenged the law, claiming it detrimental to their business. On Saturday, the group celebrated the ruling as a “triumph over hate.”

The group added in their statement, “Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry.”

Do you think it is unconstitutional to prohibit drag shows in public places?

Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, who backed the bill, voiced his disappointment at the ruling. Finding it “perplexing,” he expressed hopes that the attorney general would appeal it.

“Sadly, this ruling is a victory for those who support exposing children to sexual entertainment,” Johnson stated, emphasizing the need to safeguard the innocence of minors.

Judge Parker, in illustrating the law’s potential overreach, used an example of a woman impersonating Elvis for a performance, suggesting that she could be inadvertently violating the law as a “male impersonator.”

While the term “drag” was not explicitly used in the law’s language, Republican lawmakers referenced drag performances in their hometowns as the driving force behind the legislation.

How is it unconstitutional to protect children from being groomed and sexualized by adult grown men? This is flipping disgusting. I don’t recognize my country. https://t.co/BmzDvDNnNA

— Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) June 3, 2023

The legislators revised the state’s definition of adult cabaret to encompass “adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors,” categorizing “male or female impersonators” similarly to strippers in their capacity as adult cabaret performers.

The law, signed by Gov. Bill Lee, was set into motion on April 1, but has not been enforced as Judge Parker provisionally halted it in March following the lawsuit.

The real question is how do we reconcile the preservation of free speech with the protection of innocence?

Recently Posted