Attorney General Hunter: OK's public nudity laws still valid despite 10th Circuit ruling

Attorney General Hunter Issues Statement on 10th Circuit Ruling on Fort Collins Case

OKLAHOMA CITY – Attorney General Mike Hunter today released the following statement on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding public nudity.

The ruling from the court addressed a Fort Collins, Colo. city ordinance that prohibited women from going topless in public, after two women sued the city in 2016, arguing that the rule violated their equal protection rights.

The 10th Circuit has jurisdiction over federal cases from Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Kansas and Oklahoma.   

Attorney General Hunter advises that the ruling does not automatically invalidate local and state laws in Oklahoma.

"The Tenth Circuit’s preliminary decision in the Fort Collins case – a case that has now ended without a full adjudication – does not change local and state laws in Oklahoma on the subject,” Attorney General Hunter said. “The majority of courts around the country that have examined this issue have upheld traditional public decency and public nudity laws. These courts have recognized that states and political subdivisions have a legitimate interest in prohibiting public nudity as traditionally defined."

The 10th Circuit’s ruling conflicts with a May ruling by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld an ordinance in Springfield, MO that bans women from exposing their breasts in public. Also, a 2017 ruling in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld a topless ban on women in Chicago.

In that ruling, the 7th Circuit relied on a U.S. Supreme Court case upholding laws prohibiting nude dancing stating that “public indecency statutes were designed to protect morals and public order” and local communities may express “societal disapproval of nudity in public places and among strangers.”

The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of the 7th Circuit’s decision upholding Chicago’s public nudity laws.

Similar rulings upholding the constitutionality of public nudity laws have been issued by 2nd, 4th and 5th Circuits, as well as courts in New Hampshire, Tennessee,  Massachusetts, Alabama, Arizona, Texas, Florida, New Mexico, Mississippi, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Minnesota.

The 10th Circuit’s ruling made preliminary conclusions about the Fort Collins ordinance, but did not decide the law’s ultimate constitutionality. Because the Fort Collins ordinance was repealed, the 10th Circuit’s ruling likely cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In conclusion, the 10th Circuit’s ruling is not binding on Oklahoma state courts.

Santorum Sweeps CO, MN, and MO

Presidential candidate Rick Santorum swept last night's three GOP contests in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri with overwhelming and unexpected margins.

Santorum received 40.2% in the Colorado caucuses, with Mitt Romney at 34.9%, Newt Gingrich with 12.8%, and Ron Paul getting 11.8%. In contrast, in the 2008 caucus, Romney won the state with 60.1%, and Ron Paul was in fourth with 8.4%.

In the Minnesota caucuses, Santorum took 44.8%, Ron Paul placed second with 27.2%, Romney got 16.9%, and Gingrich received 10.7%. Former governor Tim Pawlenty had endorsed Romney, but apparently that had no influence on his state. In 2008, Romney won with 41.4%, and Paul placed fourth with 15.7%.

Caucuses like Iowa, Colorado, and Minnesota are technically non-binding, and don't award delegates. However, a win is a win, particularly when dealing with momentum, and the fact that the media and most voters don't understand the difference between a primary and a caucus when dealing with delegates.

In Missouri's primary, Santorum got 55.2%, Romney was in second place with 25.3%, and Ron Paul got 12.2%. Newt Gingrich was not on the ballot. The Missouri primary is non-binding, and has absolutely no bearing on delegates; Missouri will be holding a caucus in April that will begin the delegate process. Click here for more information on the Missouri caucus/primary situation.

Was 'Balloon Boy' a Publicity Stunt?

Most of the nation was glued to news reports yesterday after a six year-old Colorado boy allegedly was inside a compartment on a runaway hot-air balloon made by his parents.

Now, a different side to the story is coming out; the family has been featured on the ABC TV show Wife Swap two times, and is up for voting to return

During a live interview with CNN, Falcon said he had heard his family calling his name.

"You did?" the boy's mother, Mayumi Heene, said.

"Why didn't you come out?" Richard Heene said.

Falcon answered, "You had said that we did this for a show."

Later, Richard Heene bristled when the family was asked to clarify and said he didn't know what his son meant. He didn't ask his son what he meant by "a show."

Was this just a publicity stunt? Did the kid accidentally spill the beans, as children are apt to do with secrets? What do you think?