Everetts bikini baristas head to federal court to argue for freedom of exposure

[brooklynite]

Seattle Times:

Arguing that skimpy costumes and exposed flesh are an expression of the First Amendment, owners and employees of bikini barista stands in Everett are asking a federal judge for an injunction that would prevent the city from implementing two new ordinances aimed at curtailing the business.

“The Constitution doesn’t allow the government to regulate the content of speech because the government disagrees with it,” Derek Newman, one of the baristas’ attorneys, wrote in an email. “If the First Amendment was so limited, NFL players kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality would not be protected expression because the president interprets this as anti-American sentiment.”

The city has countered, in thousands of court documents, by alleging that the stands breed a “proliferation of crimes of a sexual nature” and in the past have had ties to the notorious Colacurcio organized-crime family. The city claims the scantily clad baristas feed the poisonous attitudes toward women that have led to allegations of sexual misconduct against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein and comedian Louis C.K.

“The male gaze on bikinied women is on the continuum of sexualization of women,” wrote Mary Anne Layden, Ph.D., a psychologist and director of the Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology program at the University of Pennsylvania, who has been hired by the city of Everett as an expert witness.

[BigmanPigman]

1. Aaahhh, the first amendment again.

I think Facebbok, Twitter, etc have been using that a lot lately too. I am not thrilled about having Gorsuch on the Supreme Court these days.

[Voltaire2]

2. So you would prefer we do away with it?

[ProfessorGAC]

3. We Need This?

As a consumer, someone actually needs to buy their coffee from someone barely dressed in beach attire. Really? I know they might have a leg to stand on in terms of freedom of expression, but i don't remotely understand the business model.

[Lurks Often]

4. It has nothing to do with "need", but rather "want"

And it's the same business model that works for Hooters, the Chippendale dancers and the multitude of strip clubs (mostly female stripper clubs although there a few male stripper clubs as well) across the country.

Attractive men and women in revealing outfits or nude sells whatever the owner is trying to sell.

[ProfessorGAC]

5. Not To Me

Wouldn't make me go a place, no matter what the product or service. Hence my consternation.

Also, don't think strip joints is a good comparison. That IS the product there. People can buy a beer anywhere. The product is the strippers, male or female.

Hooters is fair, i suppose, but a tight tee shirt and shorts is still a lot different, in my mind, to a bikini.