Ashland bans nudity. ACLU threatens lawsuit

The City of Ashland has spent a disproportionate amount of time, compared to other cities, on dealing with the issue of public displays of nudity thanks in part to a few clothing liberated residents. It has come down to this as the City Council enacted a ban this week and the ACLU shot back with a legal attack.

The Ashland Tidings wrote, “…Ashland already bans the display of genitals downtown and in parks. On Thursday, Mayor John Stromberg and the City Council received a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon asking the council to reconsider its plan to adopt a citywide ban on nudity. ACLU of Oregon Executive Director David Fidanque wrote that the “ACLU believes the proposed ordinance is unconstitutional and would be overturned by the courts. We urge you to reject it.” Fidanque said the citywide nudity ban would violate the Oregon Constitution’s protections for free expression.

On Tuesday night, Ashland resident and ACLU member Ralph Temple said he had been authorized to say that if the council adopted the citywide ban, the ACLU is likely to take legal action. “Don’t spend the taxpayers money uselessly on litigation,” he urged councilors. However, in voting for the citywide ban, Lemhouse said councilors shouldn’t let themselves be threatened by the ACLU.”I don’t think we should let any group dictate what our policies are through threats and intimidation,” he said.

Now the question arises on what the Oregon Supreme Court might do.

Share
  • Reper

    I know the Oregon Supreme Court has made some wild decisions, but they will not endorse this. I do not know where the ACLU is coming from.

  • v person

    Next they’ll be telling me and my partner David that we can’t wear our thongs!

    • “”

      And vp, you’ll even bend over backwards in a vain attempt to wreak your point….

      • v person

        You’re correct! My handle and any handle I switch to should be banned from posting on here…….oops, my Dean handle already is.

  • Mort

    Should be a safer city if everyone is naked. Harder to hide the undiebombs.

  • The Other One

    Typical of the ACLU in Oregon. Judges have told Sizemore he can’t raise and spend money on politics, which is blatantly unconstitutional, and the ACLU is nowhere to be seen. But some freak show issue like public displays of nudity surfaces and the ACLU is all over it.

    In other states, the ACLU at least pretends to be even handed. Here in Oregon, they are so joined with the liberal left that they don’t even pretend to protect serious First Amendment principles if a conservative or unpopular entity is involved.

  • Anonymous

    Based on earlier precedent, the Oregon Supreme Court would likely side with the ACLU. The Court upheld the right to perform live sex acts for cash as (paraphrasing) “the kind of protected political speech envisioned by our founding fathers.” If THAT can be protected, then simple nudity – which can be a valid form of political expression, whether you believe it should be protected expression or not – would surely also be protected by precedent.

  • Shoo Wu ll

    From ‘staging’ stops at hAshland to Potland, Oregon’s I-5 seems to be michael moorelike an ACLU Hồ Chí Minh trail for carrying liberal amounts of water from a certain wellspring at 201 Mission Street,
    San Francisco, CA. Too, of course, methodic hempsters are given to follow the drip trail as well.

  • John Lloyd Scharf

    Public nudity violates consent when it is done in a place where people have a reasonable expectation not to expect it. If it takes place on a beach or park designated to be clothing optional that is one thing. When it is on a public street, that is another. Regardless of IF it might be legal or “constitutional” it is wrong and infringes on the rights of others.