I agree the law probably won't stand up in court. But I must admit I was little surprised to here someone actually suggest something like that. How outrageous can you be? Also, I don't know much about Louisiana, but when I think of Lousiana, I usually think about New Orleans and the Big Easy, Mardi Gras and women flashing. The story is written from Baton Rouge, the capitol, and I don't know what area of the state the Rep. is from, but I wonder what he thinks of the women flashing at Mardi Gras.
This is a copy and paste from a news story I found on Yahoo. Seems a little too much to me but would love to hear what the ladies think.
--------------------------
BATON ROUGE, La. - People who wear low-slung pants that expose skin or "intimate clothing" would face a fine of up to $500 and possible jail time under a bill filed by a Jefferson Parish lawmaker.
State Rep. Derrick Shepherd said he filed the bill because he was tired of catching glimpses of boxer shorts and G-strings over the lowered belt lines of young adults.
The bill would punish anyone caught wearing low-riding pants with a fine of as much as $500 or as many as six months in jail, or both.
"I'm sick of seeing it," said Shepherd, a first-term legislator. "The community's outraged. And if parents can't do their job, if parents can't regulate what their children wear, then there should be a law."
The bill would be tacked onto the state's obscenity law, which restricts sexual activity in public places and the sale of sexually explicit items.
Joe Cook, head of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites)'s Louisiana chapter, said the bill probably does not meet the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites)'s standard for the prohibition of obscene behavior under the First Amendment.
"What about a woman who is wearing a bathing suit under her garment or she has something like a sarong wrapped around her and it's below her waist," he said. "I can think of a lot of workers, plumbers, who are working and expose their buttocks ..."
that wanted to make migrant workers (but not others) carry identity cards -- another scheme that was stricken as unconstitutional. This is plainly a violation of First Amendment rights and there's plenty of Supreme Court authority to that effect. It'll never pass muster.
It's just another cretinous, small-minded attempt to legislate personal behavior. But IMHO, is in the same league as legislating what consenting adults can do with their bodies and their money.
I agree the law probably won't stand up in court. But I must admit I was little surprised to here someone actually suggest something like that. How outrageous can you be? Also, I don't know much about Louisiana, but when I think of Lousiana, I usually think about New Orleans and the Big Easy, Mardi Gras and women flashing. The story is written from Baton Rouge, the capitol, and I don't know what area of the state the Rep. is from, but I wonder what he thinks of the women flashing at Mardi Gras.
-- Modified on 4/23/2004 6:15:45 PM
Sounds like one of those laws that stays on the books forever and never gets enforced. It's probably going to be that lawmaker's greatest legacy, and let's hope so. Otherwise, it's Taliban-lite.
/Zin
I do agree it's pretty stupid to try and legislate the way people dress. Seems like there are better things for the government to spend its time on. Let's face it, if someone really wants to look like a dumbass, they aren't going to let a silly thing like a law stand in their way. There are plenty of things that are more dangerous than wearing one's belt six inches below the elastic of one's boxers.
(And ladies, there are three things you should know about your low-slung pants: they make your butt look flat, they interrupt the curve of your hips in a way that makes them look a little heavier than you'd probably like them to look, and they over-emphasize the roundness of your belly. Fair warning: You do not get to dress like that and then complain about that "extra five pounds" you can't seem to lose.) (And for the record, I LIKE your curves. I like the roundness of your butt and hips and belly.)
As to the "unconstitutional, violation of free speech" comment, it's probably appropriate to review exactly what the First Amendment actual says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
I am not a constitutional scholar, but I don't see where clothing is mentioned, and an argument that butt crack is constitutionally protected goes into the same category as arguments that the Second Amendment makes it okay for Bubba and Cooter to own guns for the sole purpose of goin' plinkin'.
All of that said, this Derrick Shepherd needs to get a grip and stop speaking for the "community." How much of the community as a whole is outraged if the parents (who are ALSO part of the community) don't care enough to "regulate what their children wear"? This way of thinking among legislators is contributing to the decline of society by attacking personal responsibility. "If you won't do it, we'll do it for you." I don't know about the rest of you, but I find THAT insulting.
A final thought: Does anybody remember that Florida banned thong bathing suits on state beaches in 1990?
Obviously it's an election year in Louisiana. This guy would obviously get along with Ashcroft. Now if only nimrods such as this one would dedicate his energy to sex education in schools (Louisiana still is near tops in the country in teen pregnancy), higher literacy (Louisiana schools continue to rank near the bottom), and economic reform (anyone seen the unemployment figures in the Gulf state recently?).