Appeals Court Upholds Woman's Right To Protest While Topless

POSTED: 4:59 pm EDT October 12, 2006

UPDATED: 5:33 pm EDT October 12, 2006

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A woman, who was arrested when she exposed her breasts to protest laws that bar women from publicly going bare breasted, can demonstrate topless as part of a legitimate political protest, an appeals court has ruled.

The Seventh Judicial Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 5 upheld a Volusia County judge's opinion that Elizabeth Book could protest while topless on the city's Main Street Bridge.

Book, of Ormond Beach, was arrested by Daytona Beach police and fined $253 during Bike Week in March 2004. The city said she violated an ordinance banning public nudity that was passed in 2002 to curb indecency at special events.

Book's attorney, Lawrence G. Walters, said the latest ruling is a victory for his client, who set out to test laws against nudity because she believes they are unfairly applied to women. Deputy City Attorney Marie Hartman said the city "respectfully disagrees with the opinion." Hartman said the city is looking into an appeal to the Fifth District Court of Appeal.

Book also faces charges in a separate case, where she was arrested for appearing topless in front of topless Grecian statues near a city auditorium in July 2005. She has been charged with disorderly conduct in connection with the incident.

Previous Stories:

March 21, 2005: Women Arrested In Protest For Equal Male-Female Topless Rights
March 7, 2004: Lawyer: Women's Topless Protest Will Go On
October 28, 2003: Women Go Public With Topless Equality Fight

Police in Daytona Beach arrested five topless women Sunday during a protest over the city's anti-nudity law, according to Local 6 News.

The women, who claimed the city's law was unconstitutional removed their shirts and were arrested.

Liz Book who staged a similar protest last year, was videotaped on a stage taking off her shirt. Then, several women showed up during the protest and took their shirts off.

The women were handcuffed by police officers and led away from the protest.

Daytona Beach and Book apparently had an agreement to have a topless protest in the city but the event had to be on a covered platform away from traffic and the general public, Local 6 News reported.

The city said the supporters were supposed to stay by the covered state area to avoid arrest, according to the report.

"They started making flagrant and blatant attempts to draw attention to their cause and that exceeded the purview of our agreement, "Daytona Beach police spokesman Brian Skipper said. "These supporters were not part of the original understanding"

Book claims the city said there would not be any arrests at this year's protest.

"They just made the biggest mistake they could have ever made in violating this agreement and our constitutional rights," Book said.

Book said she will continue the fight against Daytona's anti-nudity law.

"Daytona, who do they think they are to supercede the Constitution of the United States," Book said. "Big brother needs to leave his little sisters alone.

The good looking women will have no need or inclination to do this, as they understand the lure of suggestive concealment as opposed to glaring, unrestrained exposure..

And they also understand that they can make money doing this at the Doll House as opposed to giving it away...

You and your Staff could draw up specifications for any exposed mammary elements involved, and provide consulting as well as engineering services, onsite, to rectify any documented violations.

LOL. I'm a woman (over 50) who would never bare it to the public. I wouldn't have done it at 20 either, which would have been much kinder to the male of the species. I'm just waiting for a court decision that demands cosmetic surgery so that all women have the right to upheld breasts.

You and your Staff could draw up specifications for any exposed mammary elements involved, and provide consulting as well as engineering services, onsite, to rectify any documented violations.

I have no doubt that it is only a matter of time before the ACLU discovers this avenue of litigation, and demands that all women have a 'right' to achieve their own vision of beauty, at taxpayer expense, of course.

Well, of course, it has to be at taxpayer expense. What's a poor woman to do if the ravages of time and a lack of funds keep her from her right to be beautiful? /sarc

Why is it that those most likely to take 'advantage' of this ruling are those least likely to look good doin' it?

Because they have the most to gain and the least to lose. Good-looking women don't NEED to flaunt in such a low-class way, as they understand the value and allure of seductive restraint and exciting understatement. Drunks, skanks and Leftists can't wrap their minds around such advanced concepts.

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A woman, who was arrested when she exposed her breasts to protest laws that bar women from publicly going bare breasted, can demonstrate topless as part of a legitimate political protest, an appeals court has ruled.

Am I the only one who notices the ironic stupidity of this statement?

Not to mention the ruling?

Well, of course, it has to be at taxpayer expense. What's a poor woman to do if the ravages of time and a lack of funds keep her from her right to be beautiful? /sarc

It's completely in keeping with their previous litigious efforts, as it pertains to a historically discriminated group achieving their utmost potential, whether it is in the workplace, the public square or in their own self-esteem.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.