RI ACLU Files Brief to Supreme Court Supporting Foxy Lady’s Entertainment License
Tuesday, January 01, 2019
The Rhode Island ACLU filed a “friend of the court” brief in the RI Supreme Court supporting the Foxy Lady’s effort to maintain its entertainment license pending court review.
The brief argues that the Providence Board of Licenses’ revocation of the Foxy Lady’s entertainment license earlier this month, and the failure to issue a stay of the decision pending full judicial review, violate the First Amendment rights of the club.
Read the Brief Here
“Imagine a symphony orchestra barred by the state from performing again because a musician was found to have sold marijuana to a colleague backstage. Imagine a bookstore being shuttered by the government because peace activists planned acts of civil disobedience in a backroom. Imagine a movie theater permanently closed because an employee assaulted a patron. What the City has actually done to the Foxy Lady is no different. It is a serious attack on First Amendment rights, and we hope the Court will correct this injustice,” said ACLU of RI executive director Steven Brown.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTEarlier this month, the club’s licenses to operate were revoked by the Board after undercover officers arrested three female employees for allegedly soliciting for prostitution.
The Brief
Last week, the state Department of Business Regulation overturned the Board’s revocation of the club’s liquor license, but the only avenue of appeal regarding its entertainment license is through a discretionary petition to the R.I. Supreme Court.
About this, the ACLU’s court brief says, “turns the First Amendment on its head . . . Establishments like the Foxy Lady that require entertainment licenses to engage in protected First Amendment activities face more severe punishment for the same conduct . . . than businesses that do not engage in protected speech.”
Noting that exotic dancing has long been held to be a form of expression protected by the First Amendment, the brief also argues that “courts must be especially vigilant to protect exotic dancing and other types of unpopular speech precisely because they face the greatest threats of suppression.”
In calling for the Court to “immediately grant a stay of the order revoking” the club’s license, the brief argues that the First Amendment requires a stay in order to prevent “an unconstitutional deprivation of Petitioner’s free speech pending judicial review.” The brief goes on to argue that the Board’s decision “manifestly conflicts with the requirement that ordinances that require licenses to engage in protected speech must provide administrative bodies narrow, objective, and definite standards … and must not provide unbridled discretion.”
The brief explains:
“The ordinance governing the Board’s revocation decision grants it authority to revoke a license ‘for any reason which the board may deem to be in the public interest.’ … That standard exemplifies the ‘unbridled discretion’ that the Supreme Court has repeatedly found to be inconsistent with the requirements of the First Amendment. The Board’s history of providing less severe sanctions for more serious crimes at other licensed establishments, including felony acts of violence, illustrates the unconstitutionally broad power to arbitrarily restrict protected speech.”
This story was first published 12/31/18 2:35 PM.
Related Articles
- UPDATED: Foxy Lady Licenses Revoked by Providence Board of Licenses
- Providence’s Foxy Lady Closure Sparks Legal Scramble and Unveils Chaotic System
- VIDEO: DBR Puts Off Decision, RI Supreme Court Denies Foxy Lady’s Emergency Motion
- DBR Grants Stay for Foxy Lady, Sets Stage for Club to Reopen
- Providence Board of Licenses Comes for the Foxy Lady - Guest MINDSETTER™ Brown
