Theoretically, what makes a burlesque performance a constitutionally protected form of "speech" vs. any other service that the state can regulate? There are tens of thousands of laws on the books about what businesses can and can't do, what licenses they need, and what products are services are forbidden to be sold, or how they may be sold, or how they must be labeled, or even when they can be sold. For examples states saying you can't buy or sell booze before 7am on Monday. That's constitutional. (even though commerce is regulated by Congress) What about strip clubs? Why can the state regulate nude dancers? They exclusively perform in explicitly adults-only venues, and there are still laws about what time they can take place, what they must wear, whether alcohol can be served on site, and probably many more we wouldn't even imagine. What is different about this law?
A drag show is an entertainment act. "Free Speech" in and of itself is a bit of a reductive term that actually means: "The government will not engage in viewpoint discrimination." This is why obscenity laws exist. Porn isn't a "viewpoint".
What might be interesting here from the take-away is that this could be an admission that the Drag Shows are now political speech because they advocate Queer Theory. Now, the thing is: that would absolutely be a violation of the first amendment. The state can't ban Queer Theory because it is discriminating on a viewpoint, but it would also be an admission that: yes, these drag events are no longer burlesque shows, but political rallies for Queer Ideology designed to groom children.
Theoretically, what makes a burlesque performance a constitutionally protected form of "speech" vs. any other service that the state can regulate? There are tens of thousands of laws on the books about what businesses can and can't do, what licenses they need, and what products are services are forbidden to be sold, or how they may be sold, or how they must be labeled, or even when they can be sold. For examples states saying you can't buy or sell booze before 7am on Monday. That's constitutional. (even though commerce is regulated by Congress) What about strip clubs? Why can the state regulate nude dancers? They exclusively perform in explicitly adults-only venues, and there are still laws about what time they can take place, what they must wear, whether alcohol can be served on site, and probably many more we wouldn't even imagine. What is different about this law?
Nothing. At least not really.
A drag show is an entertainment act. "Free Speech" in and of itself is a bit of a reductive term that actually means: "The government will not engage in viewpoint discrimination." This is why obscenity laws exist. Porn isn't a "viewpoint".
What might be interesting here from the take-away is that this could be an admission that the Drag Shows are now political speech because they advocate Queer Theory. Now, the thing is: that would absolutely be a violation of the first amendment. The state can't ban Queer Theory because it is discriminating on a viewpoint, but it would also be an admission that: yes, these drag events are no longer burlesque shows, but political rallies for Queer Ideology designed to groom children.