Anti-Nudity Law Ruled Unconstitutional

(Daytona Beach, Florida) U.S. District Judge John Antoon ruled that the anti-nudity laws of Daytona Beach violate the 1st and 14th Amendments and are, therefore, unconstitutional. The laws suppress free expression and deny equal protection, according to Antoon. City officials are considering an appeal.

I'm not sure this is a good idea. Although I haven't been to Daytona Beach recently, my recollection from years ago is that there are occasional problems with keeping the peace. In fact, over the years there have been some riots. Naked folks walking around would surely complicate the police officers' jobs.

Now, strictly from a personal perspective, I wouldn't mind planting myself in a lawn chair, after ordering up a tall cool beverage, and watch an afternoon's worth of attractive beach-goers pass by. It would be perfectly academic, mind you, and, of course, the anti-nudity custom would remain in effect for all males.

With regard to the law being unconstitutional, I'm going to guess that the ruling by Judge Antoon would be overturned by Judge Alito if he had to decide on appeal. From a 1st Amendment standpoint, it would seem that allowing nudity in a city bulging with hormonal youths would not be unlike shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

From an equal protection standpoint, it's stickier. Men and women are different, but the Constitution doesn't do a good job recognizing it. Probably the best method to address the disparity in clothing required for men versus women would default to "community standards" or some other boilerplate. What's interesting historically, though, is that the women who push the equal protection basis for clothing on the beach are typically the women one would least like to see unclothed. Frankly, many times they look better in a muumuu.

Anyway, if there is an appeal, I think Judge Antoon will be overruled.