On Monday night, the attempt by the town of Portland, Tennessee, to ban drag shows came to an end. For months, the town鈥檚 aldermen have been searching for a way to regulate drag shows out of existence. But the First Amendment got in their way.
It all started in August, when performers with Elite Productions put on a drag show at Envy Restaurant Bar & Grill in downtown Portland. The show was sold out, and the performers went on to hold several more successful performances.
Though popular with the public, the show became a target for the Portland board of aldermen, which has spent much of the past several months trying to find a way to ban drag shows.
In September, board members introduced an ordinance that sought to classify drag shows as 鈥渁dult cabaret,鈥� which the town described as a form of 鈥渁dult-oriented business鈥� that 鈥渕ay be erotic [in] nature.鈥� The ordinance would have allowed Portland to zone the drag show into oblivion.
The problem with the proposed ordinance is that Elite鈥檚 shows aren鈥檛 erotic 鈥� they include fully-clothed impersonators singing, dancing and performing comedy bits. (The aldermen admitted that they had never been to the show.)
Male and female impersonation is a time-honored tradition in artistic works, going back to Shakespeare鈥檚 鈥淭welfth Night鈥� and 鈥淢erchant of Venice,鈥� 鈥淵entl,鈥� 鈥淭ootsie,鈥� the Academy-award-winning 鈥淰ictor Victoria,鈥� and many more.
As the 老澳门开奖结果 of Tennessee, on behalf of Elite Productions, explained to the town in multiple letters, female and male impersonation is a form of artistic expression protected by the First Amendment. It is not inherently sexual or erotic in nature, so Elite Production鈥檚 drag shows cannot be regulated like an adult-oriented business.
Nonetheless, the aldermen hired legal counsel at taxpayer expense to advance their quest. They drafted new language that again attempted to define male or female impersonation as inherently erotic in order to regulate it as adult entertainment. The new ordinance also added language about the 鈥渟econdary effects鈥� of adult-oriented businesses, such as an impact on property values in the area, to justify regulating drag performances.
True adult-oriented businesses may indeed have secondary effects and courts have held that government can impose some reasonable restrictions on adult entertainment. However, Elite Productions鈥� shows are not erotic in nature. Not one of the studies cited by the board of aldermen connects the type of performance that Elite stages to any secondary effect that would justify such regulation.
In fact, Portland鈥檚 own high school has a tradition of an annual 鈥渨omanless beauty pageant鈥� fundraiser in which male students dress in gowns and crowns. Portland鈥檚 American Cancer Society chapter has also held 鈥渨omanless beauty pageants鈥� in the past. There has been no evidence presented that any of these performances have increased crime or brought property values down.
In the end, there was just no way around the First Amendment. The version of the that ultimately passed on Monday night mirrors the definition of 鈥渁dult cabaret鈥� found in Tennessee state law, which clarifies that adult cabarets are businesses that offer erotic entertainment with the performers exposing certain anatomical areas. Since those criteria do not apply to the Elite shows, our clients are free to perform without government interference.
As the town鈥檚 aldermen learned, just because they don鈥檛 like a particular kind of speech does not give them the power to shut it down.
