Coronavirus

New Lawsuit Argues That D.C.'s Ban on Dancing at Weddings Violates the First Amendment

A bride-to-be says the regulation is an irrational and unconstitutional restriction on her special day.

|

D.C.'s ban on dancing at weddings provoked eyerolls when it was first announced. Now a bride-to-be is suing to stop the regulation, arguing that it is an irrational and unconstitutional restriction on her special day.

On Monday, Margaret Appleby—a doctoral student and D.C. resident—filed a lawsuit against D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine in U.S. District Court, arguing that a ban on dancing at her upcoming June wedding violates her First Amendment rights.

"The First Amendment does not permit the District to irrationally discriminate against wedding dancing, while simultaneously allowing equally dangerous, though less expressive, activities to continue without remark," said Adam Schulman, a senior attorney with the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, which along with the Liberty Justice Center is representing Appleby.

The wedding dancing ban was first announced as part of Bowser's April 26 public health order. That order allows "multi-purpose" facilities to host weddings and other "special non-recurring events" at 25 percent capacity without the need for a special city waiver starting May 1. But it also required attendees to be seated. "Standing and dancing are not allowed," reads the order.

This restriction applies to Appleby's wedding in spite of all the other health precautions she had agreed to take, including requiring guests and vendors to be masked (unless seated and eating), making available guests' contact information for contact tracing purposes, and providing hand sanitizer throughout the venue.

Appleby and her fiance were planning to have a maskless "first dance," which they assumed was permissible given that they are members of the same household and have both been vaccinated. The explicit ban on dancing came as a shock to them, and to wedding planners throughout the city.

Both dancing and wedding rituals, Appleby's lawsuit argues, are First Amendment–protected expression. To restrict this expression while permitting dancing in fitness classes and strip clubs is, it says, "arbitrary and underinclusive."

Their lawsuit also argues that D.C.'s restriction on expressive dancing is not "narrowly tailored" to achieve the city's public health goals, because it bans dancing even if participants are masked or vaccinated.

The lawsuit asks that D.C.'s ban on masked, socially distanced dancing be ruled unconstitutional and the city be prevented from enforcing it.

The reopening of the country's most restrictive jurisdictions—a group that definitely includes D.C.—has produced a bizarre mix of restored freedoms and arbitrary restrictions. COVID-hawk governors and mayors are begrudgingly permitting more activities while also regulating them to death. Lawsuits like Appleby's are a necessary corrective to the absurd rules that are coming along with these halting reopenings.

NEXT: Liz Cheney's Expected Ouster Shows the GOP Stands for Nothing but One Man's Whims

Coronavirus D.C. Pandemic Nanny State Marriage Public Health

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

32 responses to “New Lawsuit Argues That D.C.'s Ban on Dancing at Weddings Violates the First Amendment

  1. She just wants grandma to die.

    1. After leaving my previous job 11 months ago, I’ve had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me… They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $11600… MOi Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.

      Read all about it here….. Click here

      1. USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

  2. Whipping my dick out in congress should also be protected free speech. Am I right?

    1. Yes, definitely.

    2. There’s already a bunch of dicks in congress. You might not get noticed.

    3. Only if you’re not wearing a buffalo headdress.

    4. I believe the Supreme Court has held that sticking your dick in the mashed potatoes in the Congressional dining rooms is NOT protected free speech.

      But it is a very narrow First Amendment exemption.

      1. “…sticking your dick in the mashed potatoes in the Congressional dining rooms”

        For some reason I am finding that imagery to be incredibly funny

    5. Depends; is your dick named “Weiner?”

  3. Wedding vows are not a suicide pact.

    1. Don’t be so certain.

  4. pissing off chicks is a bad way to enact your policy.

  5. What are they going to do, arrest you for dancing? Yeesh.

    1. If you’ve seen some of the wedding dances I’ve seen, it should be a capital crime.

    2. Fine you. They gotta pay for DC government somehow.

  6. So don’t get married in D.C. Plenty of venues in Maryland and Virginia.

  7. Wow, since when has DC been run by fundamentalist Baptists?

    1. They all need to be cut loose.

    2. Q: Why don’t Baptists fuck standing up?

      A: Someone might think they are dancing.

    3. Jews do not recognize the divinity of Christ.
      Protestants don’t recognize the infallibility of the Pope.
      Baptists don’t recognize each other in the liquor store.

  8. All it shows is the dem party is full of illiberal authoritarian assholes some of whom came from the GOP while still trying to hold onto power.

    1. tAnd the pandemic is a gift that keeps on giving; apparently Fauci just said we might hope a return to “normal” around Mothers Day, 2022; plenty of time for them to enjoy their new found powers.

      1. May 2022 – – it’s just coincidental that this is the approximate date when congressional races start announcing for the fall.

  9. To restrict this expression while permitting dancing in fitness classes and strip clubs is,

    Or, you know, as she’s heard, from a couple of her friends while they were all a proper socially-distanced at her… I wouldn’t even call it a bachelorette party really, just a muted social gathering with friends.

  10. “Standing and dancing are not allowed,” reads the order.

    “However, please use one of our gender-specific tents to don your complementary diaper before entering the venue.”

    1. 56 gender specific tents really eats into the wedding budget.

      1. Once you get to 3 genders you might as well say fuck it and reduce it to 1 bathroom, changing room, etc.

        1. Transphobe…

  11. “special non-recurring events”

    Given the divorce rate, are weddings actually non-recurring events?

    Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton for instance.

  12. After leaving my previous job 11 months ago, I’ve had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me… They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $11600… MOi Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.

    Read all about it here….. https://wapexclusive.com

  13. Rediculous! Just bring a wad of singles to a strip joint and dance to your hearts content…

Comments are closed.