A judge in Montana blocked a law banning drag shows in front of minors in state-funded public venues just two days before a massive state-wide Pride celebration is set to begin.
Montana Pride 2023 in Helena, will take place from July 30 to August 6. Participants can register for $50 each.
U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris said the law “will disproportionally harm not only drag performers, but any person who falls outside traditional gender and identity norms.” (RELATED: Teacher Says She Was Fired For Attending Drag Show. Pastor From School Cites ‘Godly Rule)
Montana became the first state in the nation to ban drag shows in public spaces where minors could be present in May. Republican state Rep. Mitchel Braxton, the bill’s sponsor, said they had started, “something across the country that many other states are going to follow.” The bill passed the House 66-33 and the Senate 29-21.
Montana judge temporarily lifts ban on drag performances ahead of major Pride event https://t.co/y6jZ4UQ7uM
— POLITICO (@politico) July 29, 2023
“Plaintiffs, along with the approximately 15,000 Montanans who wish to attend the (Montana Pride) events, cannot avoid chilled speech or exposure to potential civil or criminal liability,” the judge wrote.
A group of transgender activists have sued the state over the bill, saying it is, “impermissibly vague.” Some of the plaintiffs include the owners of venues which have hosted such performances. One plaintiff worried the law would affect her ability to dress up as literary characters and put on presentations at a highs school.
A judge recently struck down a Montana law requiring a court order to legally change one’s sex. Judge Michael Moses of the 13th Judicial District Court said that transgender individuals in the state would no longer have to receive a sex change surgery and a court order to change their sex on their driver’s license or birth certificate.
A Tennessee bill restricting drag performances for children was temporarily blocked by a judge in March. The judge said that the law was “unconstitutionally vague” and encouraged “discriminatory enforcement.”