Pennsylvania high court: Topless dancing and alcohol don't mix
By The Associated Press
01.08.03
PHILADELPHIA — The state has a right to ban topless dancing at clubs that serve alcohol, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled in a case that reaffirms a key provision of the state's Liquor Code.
It was the first time since 1959 that the court decided a First Amendment challenge to the Liquor Code's ban on "lewd, immoral or improper entertainment." The provision has been interpreted as requiring erotic dancers at clubs serving alcohol to wear pasties and G-strings.
"This was a very important decision for the state police in our efforts to enforce the Liquor Code. The Supreme Court concluded that the restrictions on entertainment which are found in the Liquor Code do not infringe upon a bar's First Amendment rights of free speech," said Thomas Ballaron, who argued the case for the state police.
The ruling comes nearly eight years after Purple Orchid, a Philadelphia cabaret, was cited by state police for allowing erotic dancers to perform with only transparent liquid latex covering their breasts. The club was fined $1,000.
The Purple Orchid had argued the Liquor Code's ban on "lewd" entertainment violates the First Amendment by "impacting negatively on the erotic message of the dance." But the court, in an 18-page opinion released on Jan. 6, said the ban is a "content-neutral" regulation aimed at preventing "negative secondary effects of nude dancing."
Michael Durst, an attorney for Purple Orchid, didn't return a telephone call seeking comment yesterday. But an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was considered unlikely because the decision relied heavily on a recent ruling by that court.
It was the second time in a month the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in a nude dancing case. Last month, the court said the city of Erie couldn't ban nude-dancing clubs simply because of a perceived negative effect on surrounding neighborhoods.
But Ballaron said that case differed from the Purple Orchid case because the club in Erie didn't serve alcohol, and the challenge involved the Pennsylvania Constitution, which the court said provides an even broader scope concerning free speech than the U.S. Constitution.