The Supreme Court on Monday decided not to "Free the Nipple," refusing to hear an appeal by three women fined by a city in New Hampshire for exposing their breasts in public who argued that banning female but not male toplessness violates the U.S. Constitution.
The justices left in place a 2019 ruling by New Hampshire's top court upholding the women's convictions for violating an ordinance in the city of Laconia that makes it illegal to show female breasts in public "with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple."
The women - Heidi Lilley, Kia Sinclair and Ginger Pierro - were involved in the "Free the Nipple" movement, which court papers described as campaigns against "sexualized objectification of women" and in favor of women being able to go topless in public if they wish.
More
14 comments:
shame but prolly a good thing. can't unsee some things!
Darn, I was going to start going to the beach this summer......
Soros loses.
These women are just exhibitionists. Looking for attention.
This article needs pictures!
But a kid can get an aboration without parents consent...welcome to BIZAAROO WORLD
Good verdict. Imagine that you would look at nipples that you didn"t want to see.
YYYYYEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!! Great decision. That so called family resort doesn't need that BS.
I’ll bet that will put a dent in the plaintiffs in the ocean city case
Well they do have a point, the only difference in a male boob or a female boob is the fat tissue, everything else is and looks the same... Hell with how men are so stupid, fat and lazy, they have bigger boobs than most women so... They do have a point...
So common sense prevails. At least a little morality still exists.
Men need to start "freeing the Penis" for solidarity. Let it get some sun, and fresh air. Let OC deal with that!
A wise man once said, "Once you've seen one set, you'll want to see them all"
Here's a marketing opportunity for designer opaque nipple caps.
Post a Comment