The lawsuit on Tennesseeโs controversial ban on adult entertainment will remain intact after a refusal to hear the case from the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
A statement from the Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti saidย the court unanimously decided to โreject a full circuit review of the Friends of Georgeโs, Inc v. Steven Mulroy.โ
Friends of Georgeโs has not said how this will affect any their productions moving forward, but they only allowed audience members 18 and up to attend their last show in August.
According to the court order filed on September 20th, the court received a petition to hear the case again. All judges in the court received the petition, yet they all declined to review it as a full court.
โNo judge has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing,โ the order said. โTherefore, the petition is denied. Judge [Andre] Mathis would grant rehearing for the reasons stated in is dissent.โ
In July the court reversed the U.S. District Court of the Western Districtโs decision to halt the enforcement of the controversial law. According to Friends of Georgeโs the court decided in a 2-to-1 ruling that they lacked standing, which led to the lawsuit being dismissed.
Judge Mathis wrote in his dissent that part of Tennesseeโs Adult Entertainment Act (AEA) is an โunconstitutional content-based restriction on speech.โ
โThe freedom to convey oneโs ideas โ no matter how unpopular โ was seen as inalienable to the human experience, and the Framers of our Federal Constitution believed such freedom was โessential if vigorous enlightenment was ever to triumph over slothful ignorance,โโ Mathis said.
Mathis went on to analyze the language of the Adult Entertainment Act which makes performing โadult cabaret entertainmentโ on public property or in a place that a child can view it a crime. These performances are defined as those that feature โtopless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar entertainers.โ
The dissent went on to say that Friends of Georgeโs has the right to sue since the law could stop them from doing their shows. The Tennessee Attorney Generalโs office argued that the company hasnโt been harmed by the law and canโt sue. However, Mathis argued they donโt have to be in trouble to challenge the law.
Skrmetti said he was glad the Court of Appeals declined to rehear the case as his office โfought hard to defend Tennesseeโs Adult Entertainment Act.โ
โTennessee, home to an incredible community of performers and songwriters, respects the awesome importance of the First Amendment,โ Skrmetti said. โBut the First Amendment allows states to restrict adult entertainment to adult-only spaces.โ
The law stated that these โadult cabaret performancesโ were โharmful to minors.โ It made โadult cabaret performancesโ on public property or โin a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adultโ a criminal offense.
During the hearing, Friends of Georgeโs was required to show that they planned to continue performances and that these productions were protected by the First Amendment. The company showed videos of their past shows which included satire of The View where performers โdescrib[ed] sexual acts including intercourse and masturbation,โ and another video showed a group of actors satirizing a song by Meatloaf while portraying sexual acts.
While the First Amendment protects both words and actions, the โexpressive conductโ must convey a clear message and be understood by the audience, which Friends of Georgeโs productions do.
Though the district court ruled that the Adult Entertainment Act was unconstitutional as it limited free speech, Mathis argued they made a mistake by saying that the district attorneyโs office couldnโt enforce the public property clause, as the theater group could not challenge that part.

