High court lets Alabama sex-toy ban stand

seattletimes.com ^ | 10/01/07 | PHILLIP RAWLS

[TornadoAlley3]

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — The U.S. Supreme Court declined today to hear a challenge to Alabama's ban on the sale of sex toys, ending a nine-year legal battle and sending a warning to store owners to clean off their shelves. An adult-store owner had asked the justices to throw out the law as an unconstitutional intrusion into the privacy of the bedroom. But the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, leaving intact a lower court ruling that upheld the law. Sherri Williams, owner of Pleasures stores in Huntsville and Decatur, said she was disappointed, but plans to sue again on First Amendment free speech grounds. "My motto has been they are going to have to pry this vibrator from my cold, dead hand. I refuse to give up," she said.

[Thermalseeker]

we don’t want this here. No opinion, just fact

Then let the voters decide. If it's not just someone's opinon and is truly fact, then the voters will choose what they really want. I have a real problem with these "holier than thou" busybodies in elected office managing every aspect of our lives. You should too, comrade.

[Durus]

States don’t have rights they have powers. Where in the Alabama constitution is the enumerated power to regulate these devices?

[silentreignofheroes]

I am concerned,maybe more than it shows..This might show up on this next ballot,,though you and i both know you can’t legislate morals.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

but what about Commerce Clause?

The Commerce Clause means no grass, no dildoes, no fun of any kind.

[varyouga]

What about ‘back massagers’? They are marketed as such but commonly used otherwise.

Or glass ‘fruit’ like bananas.

What’s next? Banning anything that can be used as a toy?

[BlueMondaySkipper]

Will Alabama next ban the male hand? Or just remove it if it is found in an act of, uh, well, you get the idea.

[jwalsh07]

I think this is kind of silly but I would wholeheartedly support a federal law banning dildo's from Congress.

[NYFriend]

I’m with the North. I fail to see how it’s either the feds or the state’s business.

[LilAngel]

OMG, you’re series, aren’t you? I hear back massagers are legal in every state, and with a little bit of creative thinking just might eliminate that excessive tension.

[Thermalseeker]

,i>you and i both know you can’t legislate morals

Yep, but that doesn't stop the "holier than thou" politico's from trying. Funny thing is, my experience shows the best way to lead is by example. If that is the case, why is it so many of these politico's keep getting caught in Men's rooms trying to solicite gay sex, or getting caught with $100K in their freezer, or the multitude of them that have extramarital affairs or show up on high priced call-girl lists? Do as I sez, not as I does....

[Durus]

I’m serious that states, like the federal government, only have (or at least are supposed to only have) those powers delegated to them by the people. As far the actual “toys” go, I could care less who uses them or not as that immaterial. If your only comment concerning this view is suggesting I use a back massager to relieve some claimed “tension” then I suggest that you missed the point. So to speak.

[najida]

Dates aren’t guaranteed to satisfy....or do much of anything come to think of it....

[highball]

I’m serious that states, like the federal government, only have (or at least are supposed to only have) those powers delegated to them by the people.

Agreed.

I can only presume that the Alabama Constitution allows the state to regulate businesses in this way.

I think such a law is silly and immoral (government of any kind telling free adults what legal products they can and cannot buy and sell?), but the Fed should keep its nose out.

[RockinRight]

It IS a states’ rights issue, and as a Federalist, I think that legally, the SCOTUS got it right.

However, on a side note, this is exactly the kind of uber-religious nanny state bullsh*t perpetuated by a certain segment of so-called “conservatives” that turns off a lot of voters.

[RockinRight]

See my last post. Welcome to the Holier-than-Thou club.

[RockinRight]

Sounds as if you speak from experience?

;-)

[RockinRight]

Constitutionally, Alabama is probably within their rights to pass such a law...but my opinion is further showcased in post 54.

[Shyla]

Ping!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

States’ rights

Exactly, this is a good dose of federalism. If Alabama wants to ban sex toys, good for them.

[Clemenza]

"States Rights" do NOT trump the powers granted to the Federal Government by the other amendments and articles in the Constitution. The incorporation clause of the 14th means that the "States Rights" crowd can't pick and choose which articles/amendments of the constitution they can or can't obey.

If the sheeple in CA ever voted in one of their asinine mobocratic ballot initiatives to ban all firearms, you folks would be singing a different tune regarding "States Rights."