Free Speech Coalition Says Supreme Court's Decision on Nude Dancing Changes Little if Anything From Earlier Opinions on the Subject' - Trade Association for the Adult Entertainment Industry Asserts That the Majority Opinion Offers 'The Same Confusing Rationale' for Ordinances That
The Free Speech Coalition, trade association for the adult entertainment industry, said that the U.S. Supreme Court has changed "little if anything" from the Court's earlier opinions on nude dancing. The Coalition said that the Court's majority opinion offers "essentially the same confusing rationale" for ordinances which censor forms of free speech.
In a six-to-three opinion last week, the Court supported an Erie, Pennsylvania, ordinance that requires dancers to wear at least pasties and a G-string. The Court's majority opinion said the ruling was a way of combating "negative secondary effects" the opinion said was associated with establishments offering that kind of entertainment.
Jeffrey J. Douglas, attorney for the Free Speech Coalition, noted that Justice David Souter's views on nude dancing had "dramatically changed" since his opinion in a similar case in 1991. Voting with the minority last week, he said that because Erie had not provided any evidence of "secondary effects," and "the (Erie) ordinance was unconstitutional."
