S.C. high court upholds state's tattoo ban
By The Associated Press
03.05.02
Printer-friendly page
COLUMBIA, S.C. — The state Supreme Court yesterday upheld a conviction for illegal tattooing, saying the process of tattooing is not protected by the First Amendment.
Ronald P. White of Florence was sentenced to five years' probation for illegal tattooing. He appealed to the high court in November, saying the law violates his First Amendment right of free expression.
The state argued that the law, which prohibits tattooing by anyone other than a physician, is a public health issue.
In the ruling, justices compared the First Amendment right of burning an American flag with the act of tattooing. Past U.S. Supreme Court rulings have protected flag burning because they conveyed obvious political messages, the justices wrote.
"Unlike burning the flag, the process of injecting dye to create the tattoo is not sufficiently communicative to warrant protections and outweigh the risks to public safety," the justices wrote.
"We agree with the dissent to the extent it argues content is not a justifiable reason to regulate tattooing, but find that the danger associated with the activity of tattooing, whether artwork or not, is a legitimate reason to regulate it."
The state argued that tattooing can lead to hepatitis and other communicable diseases, and White agreed that tattooing can cause risks if proper sterilization methods are not taken, according to the ruling.
White, therefore, "as much as conceded a rational relationship between tattooing and public health. As discussed, the Legislature's exercise of police power is not subject to judicial correction unless its action is arbitrary and unreasonable," justices wrote.
Justice John Waller dissented, saying tattooing contains elements of communication and falls within the scope of the First Amendment.
"In my view, there is no doubt that, in creating words, pictures, or images on the bodies of those who wear tattoos, White is intending to convey a message and the message is likely to be understood by those who view it," Waller wrote.
"White's conduct in creating tattoos is a form of art which is entitled to the same protection as any other form of art."
Like many other states across the country, South Carolina passed a law in the 1960s to outlaw tattooing. Only Oklahoma and South Carolina continue the ban.
In October 2000, a Massachusetts trial judge ruled that state's law — similar to South Carolina's — violated free-speech rights. Another judge kept the ban in effect for several months so the state could create industry regulations, and tattoo parlors began operating there legally in February.
However, the state allows other forms of body art, such as piercing. In that case, practitioners must be licensed and regulated. White's attorney, Jared Newman, said similar regulation would eliminate the public health concerns surrounding tattoos.
White, 32, said he has given many illegal tattoos in South Carolina. He challenged the law when a Florence television station aired footage of him giving a tattoo in 1999.
Update
Starr joins challenge to S.C. tattoo ban
Former special prosecutor appeals tattoo artist's case to Supreme Court.
07.29.02
Previous
S.C. high court scrutinizes state's tattoo ban
Justices needle lawyers over question of whether practice is an issue of free speech or public health.
11.15.01
Related
Massachusetts judge temporarily revives tattoo ban
Court gives state health officials until Jan. 31 to ink new regulations.
11.21.00
State judge rubs out Massachusetts tattoo ban
Court sides with tattooing enthusiasts who claim marking the body is form of expression.
10.24.00
