Tennessee plans to appeal a ruling that declares the state’s anti-drag law is unconstitutional

Tennessee’s attorney general says he plans to appeal a federal judge’s ruling that threw out the state’s anti-drag law.

The Adult Entertainment Act, or AEA, was ruled unconstitutional late Friday night, but there’s still confusion about the law’s current status.

Technically, the judge only blocked the law from being enforced in Memphis and Shelby County. That’s because Gov. Bill Lee and Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti were removed as defendants in the lawsuit, leaving only the Shelby County district attorney as the sole defendant. In a statement, Skrmetti said that means the AEA “remains in effect” for the rest of the state.

The judge also declared the law unconstitutional. That gives the rest of the state declaratory relief, according to plaintiffs’ attorney Melissa Stewart. She says the state’s appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court could result in a clearer rejection of the law and a determination that drag is legal in Tennessee statewide.

Stewart represents Friends of George’s, a Memphis-based theater company that raises money for the city’s LGBTQ+ community by performing original plays. The nonprofit filed suit in late March, arguing that the law would’ve violated their First Amendment rights, and that it would’ve had a chilling effect on the state’s LGBTQ+ community.

Judge Parker agreed, writing that the AEA “encourages discriminatory enforcement.”

The AEA never mentions drag, instead referring to performers as “male or female impersonators.” The judge notes that in a transcript from the legislature, “drag” is referenced 29 times, while “male or female impersonators” is said 11 times. Parker writes that “the Tennessee General Assembly carelessly, if not intentionally, passed the AEA for the inappropriate purpose of chilling constitutionally-protected speech.”

Attorney General Skrmetti says that the law has been misrepresented.

“This narrowly-tailored law protects minors from exposure to sexually explicit performances. Its operative language is rooted in the U.S. Supreme Court’s long-established First Amendment precedent,” Skrmetti said in a statement. 

When asked what behavior this law prohibits that isn’t covered by existing obscenity laws, a spokesperson for the Attorney General’s Office said it had no further comment.