They're picking up bad vibrations
"Vibrators 60% off! Everything must go!"
That's one sign you'll never see in Alabama if the state's ban on sex toy sales remains in force. The law's six-year odyssey through the federal judiciary will have one final stop if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear store owners' appeal of a ruling that upheld the ban as constitutional. A plaintiff's lawyer said he should know by next month whether the nation's highest court will review the case.
The state attorney general's office has devoted way too many public resources to defending the ban on selling "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." That's especially true when you consider that the 1998 obscenity law's legislative sponsor apparently lost interest in the sex toys provision long ago.
In addition, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ban appears inconsistent with the core principles of the Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, the case that declared a discriminatory anti-sodomy law unconstitutional and recognized that "[t]he state cannot demean [people's] existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime." There's also the little matter of how the ban, as U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith wrote, seems to have "no rational relation to a legitimate state interest," but we'll save that argument for another day.
It's fine if Alabama wants to restrict the sale of sex toys to certain areas, but a blanket ban is excessive and illogical, especially since it's still perfectly legal for Alabamians to own the toys. Quite simply, we have better things to do than waste tax money on fighting fake penises.
That's one sign you'll never see in Alabama if the state's ban on sex toy sales remains in force. The law's six-year odyssey through the federal judiciary will have one final stop if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear store owners' appeal of a ruling that upheld the ban as constitutional. A plaintiff's lawyer said he should know by next month whether the nation's highest court will review the case.
The state attorney general's office has devoted way too many public resources to defending the ban on selling "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." That's especially true when you consider that the 1998 obscenity law's legislative sponsor apparently lost interest in the sex toys provision long ago.
In addition, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ban appears inconsistent with the core principles of the Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, the case that declared a discriminatory anti-sodomy law unconstitutional and recognized that "[t]he state cannot demean [people's] existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime." There's also the little matter of how the ban, as U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith wrote, seems to have "no rational relation to a legitimate state interest," but we'll save that argument for another day.
It's fine if Alabama wants to restrict the sale of sex toys to certain areas, but a blanket ban is excessive and illogical, especially since it's still perfectly legal for Alabamians to own the toys. Quite simply, we have better things to do than waste tax money on fighting fake penises.
posted by Alabamian at 3:05 AM
<< Home