Are Tattoos Free Speech?

[tomm2thumbs]

In the city of Hermosa Beach and other upscale oceanfront communities, tattooing is effectively banned for what city officials say is a risk to the public's health, safety and welfare.

(John Anderson's) request to open a parlor there (Hermosa Beach) was denied on grounds that zoning laws don't allow tattooing anywhere in the city. He sued in federal court in Los Angeles, alleging suppression of his 1st Amendment right to impart artistic expression on customers' bodies.

The tattoo artist lost the first round of his legal challenge in 2008 when a federal judge deemed tattooing "not sufficiently imbued with elements of communication" to qualify as constitutionally protected speech.

Anderson took his case to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals this month, and some constitutional law scholars predict the outcome could be different in what would be the first — and potentially precedent-setting — federal appellate decision on whether the tattoo artist is engaged in 1st Amendment-protected activity when designing and applying custom tattoos.



Story reference:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/05/do-tattoos-have-free-speech-protection-court-hears-1st-amendment-fight-what-do-you-think.html

[joeybee12]

1. naw, they can deny...what they can't stop you from doing is

having a tattoo.

[Richardo]

2. ...because there's nowhere else in Los Angeles County where you can tattoo people

That's what zoning laws are for, John. Change into a dry pair of diapers and get on with your life.

[Codeine]

3. Tattoos are free speech,

but that has fuck-all to do with zoning laws. A newspaper is free speech, but if I set up a commercial printing press and began publishing Codeine's Daily out of my garage I'd have very little room to piss and moan if the city deemed it a zoning violation.

[tomm2thumbs]

4. I'm curious if kids can be sent home from school for controversial tattoos

not necessarily pornographic, but statements against other people, races, etc. It's not like they be told 'go home and take off that skin and come back to school.' I could see the religious right start to use tattoos as 'politically protected' in order to do similar things they've tried with T-shirt wearers.

WBC's Rev. Phelps would probably send his kids in with 'God Kills US Soldiers' just to test the waters. Everyone wants to push the envelope to find out what happens.


Faculty ban on tattoos - article
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=9934567

[NoNothing]

6. Yes, BUT

Only if the anti-tatoo policy is entirely viewpoint neutral. That is, the prohibition cannot be based on the viewpoint expressed by the tatoo, but by some other neutral criteria. E.g., if you allow "black pride" you have to allow "white pride" and vice versa. But you could certainly just have a rule saying no visible word tatoos.

[RobinA]

I'm Thinking Not

Speech is speech when it comes to it being regulated. Within reason (fire in a theater). I'm going to argue that having a swastika is speech and you can't ban it even if you ban "Mom" too. Both being speech. Zoning is a different ball game.

[RobinA]

8. I'm Thinking Not

Speech is speech when it comes to it being regulated. Within reason (fire in a theater). I'm going to argue that having a swastika is speech and you can't ban it even if you ban "Mom" too. Both being speech. Zoning is a different ball game.

[petronius]

5. Do the zoning laws ban tattooing, or just having a tattoo business?

Even if tattoos and tattooing are protected free speech, that's not the same as saying that conducting this speech for profit is protected, right?

[slackmaster]

7. I think it's pretty messed up that HB would take such an authoritarian position

Tattoo artists are already regulated by the state.

http://www.everytattoo.com/californialaw.shtml

[tomm2thumbs]

9. I'm guessing he is trying to pull the 'federal law trumps state & local limits' idea

regulating practices is one thing, but 'prohibiting by zoning' protected speech is probably the fine line he's trying to draw, I'm guessing. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but these soft-edge issues which deal with gray areas on both sides are always interesting to me. They are probably going to do a lot of research on things the city chooses NOT to ban, and then put them alongside those they do, and let the court draw a line between what the city is prejudging as 'unsafe business' and what is considered 'legal but unpopular business'.

If their argument is truly 'risk to public health safety and welfare'*, I'm supposing they'll have to provide evidence of that - if they are going to try to suggest local laws trump whatever Federal rights his lawyers are going to argue.

That argument could be made for a lot of things that might be unpopular yet perfectly legal. My guess is the gun law struck down in Washington DC recently will play into this case somewhat, given what cities can and cannot regulate & to what extent regulation becomes prohibition. Regulation, yes. Outright prohibition by way of regulation, perhaps not.


* There used to be bans on gay bars using many of the same arguments. The last was a state law in Virginia struck down in 1991 - quite recently when you consider the big picture.

Again, I find this interesting.



updating to try & fix broken link

*Link on VA bar ban http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=fll&tbo=p&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbs=tl%3A1&q=history+of+bans+on+gay+bars&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

[Johonny]

10. frankly I don't get it? Half of Hermosa has a tattoo anyways

It's not like Hermosa is Manhattan Beach. It's a place filled with college bars, biker bars (which you can smoke in for some reason) and adult book stores. Most of the youth already have tattoos and/or piercing. So I'm saying Hermosa is kinda exactly the place I'd expect a tattoo place would do good business. Really in no way would a tattoo place change mine or any LA residents image of Hermosa beach.


Me and my brother were talking to one another about what makes a man a man...

[Xicano]

11. LAND OF THE FREE!!!

[Warren Stupidity]

12. Of course it is artistic expression. That judge is full of the stupid.

There is a public health case for regulating tattoo parlor practices to prevent disease, but regulation cannot include prohibition.