Kia Sinclair stands topless on Hampton Beach in Hampton, N.H. on July 30, 2015. Three New Hampshire women are asking the US Supreme Court to declare that a city ordinance banning women from appearing topless in public violates the Constitution by treating men and women differently. The Supreme Court will likely announce in early October whether it will hear the case.
Home / Latest / Leave nudity laws to locals, New Hampshire tells Supreme Court
Latest

Leave nudity laws to locals, New Hampshire tells Supreme Court

Large NatCorn Logo
© NatCorn

Leave nudity laws to locals, New Hampshire tells Supreme Court

Three women who were convicted of public nudity at a beach were part of a campaign for the rights of women to go topless.

There’s no reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on New Hampshire’s “Free the Nipple” case, the state attorney general said this week.

The high court is deciding whether to accept the appeal of three women who were convicted of public nudity at Weirs Beach in Laconia in 2016. Part of a campaign advocating for the rights of women to go topless, Heidi Lilley, Kia Sinclair and Ginger Pierro argue the city’s ordinance discriminates on the basis of gender and that the Supreme Court should step in to settle disagreements on the issue that have arisen elsewhere.

Kia Sinclair stands topless on Hampton Beach in Hampton, N.H. on July 30, 2015. Three New Hampshire women are asking the US Supreme Court to declare that a city ordinance banning women from appearing topless in public violates the Constitution by treating men and women differently. The Supreme Court will likely announce in early October whether it will hear the case.
Rich Beauchesne / Portmsouth Herald via AP file Kia Sinclair stands topless on Hampton Beach in Hampton, N.H. on July 30, 2015. Three New Hampshire women are asking the US Supreme Court to declare that a city ordinance banning women from appearing topless in public violates the Constitution by treating men and women differently. The Supreme Court will likely announce in early October whether it will hear the case.

The court asked the state to respond in September. In its filing this week, the state said there has been no meaningful disagreement. Nearly every state high court and federal appeals court has upheld similar ordinances, it said. And the only federal appeals court that ruled to the contrary involved reviewing a preliminary injunction, not the merits of the law.

The conflict the women identify is therefore “illusory,” the state said, and the court need not “wade into areas better left for the policy making of local legislative bodies.”

Continued…Read full original article…

Source: NBC News

Original publication 7 December, 2019

Posted on NatCorn 27th December 2019

Reference to an article does not infer endorsement of any views expressed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept the Privacy Policy