Opinion ID: 76258
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: O'Brien's Fourth Prong

Text: 65 O'Brien's fourth prong requires that any incidental restriction on alleged First Amendment freedoms be no greater than is essential to further the government's interest. O'Brien, 391 U.S. at 376, 88 S.Ct. 1673. In Pap's A.M., the Court upheld a public nudity statute that permitted erotic dancers to wear at least pasties and a G-string, holding that it satisfied this part of the O'Brien test. 529 U.S. at 301, 120 S.Ct. 1382. The Court also upheld a similar statute in Barnes. 501 U.S. at 570, 587. Here, however, Manatee County went beyond the regulations at issue in Pap's A.M. and Barnes, according to which pasties and a G-string are sufficient to distinguish a state of lawful dress from unlawful nudity. Instead, the County has defined nudity more expansively to encompass the wearing of any clothing covering less than one-third of the buttocks or one-fourth of the female breast. 22 The County has also expressly forbidden the wearing of G-strings, T-backs, dental floss, and thongs. In other words, the County has effectively redrawn the boundary between nudity and non-nudity, thereby prohibiting erotic dancers from wearing the amount of body covering the Court found to be consistent with the First Amendment in Pap's A.M. and Barnes. 66 The question we face is whether the County's prohibition, which presumably impacts the expressive component of erotic dancing, is no greater than essential to further the County's interest in preventing secondary effects. In Pap's A.M., the Court determined that this issue required the balancing of competing interests, and it concluded that a pasties and G-string requirement survived intermediate scrutiny because it leaves ample capacity to convey the dancer's erotic message. 529 U.S. at 301, 120 S.Ct. 1382. The Court further emphasized that: 67 [E]ven if Erie's public nudity ban has some minimal effect on the erotic message by muting that portion of the expression that occurs when the last stitch is dropped, the dancers at Kandyland and other such establishments are free to perform wearing pasties and G-strings. Any effect on the overall expression is de minimis. 68 Id.; see also id. at 294, 120 S.Ct. 1382. 69 Applying these considerations to Ordinance 99-18, we think it significant that the Supreme Court has emphasized that local governments `must be allowed a reasonable opportunity to experiment with solutions to admittedly serious problems.' Id. at 301, 120 S.Ct. 1382 (quoting Renton, 475 U.S. at 52, 106 S.Ct. 925). Nevertheless, we find it difficult to conclude on this record that preventing erotic dancers from wearing G-strings, thongs, pasties and the like has only a  de minimis  effect on the expressive component of erotic dancing or leaves ample capacity to convey the dancer's erotic message. Id. On the contrary, because erotic dancers in Manatee County are not free to perform wearing pasties and G-strings, id., arguably, the County's prohibition could significantly impact that message. 70 This concern about the scope of Ordinance 99-18, although raised squarely by the Adult Lounges, has not yet been adequately addressed either by the Defendants or by the District Court. Because of the importance of this issue, we are reluctant to rule without further argument from the parties and findings by the District Court. On remand, therefore, the parties and the District Court should also consider whether Ordinance 99-18 would fail under intermediate scrutiny because it proscribes too much protected expression and fails to preserve ample capacity to convey the dancer's erotic message. 529 U.S. at 301, 120 S.Ct. 1382. Cf. Ranch House, 238 F.3d at 1285-86 (11th Cir.2001) (remanding under similar circumstances with specific guidance to the District Court as to O'Brien's fourth prong). 23 71 In sum, we hold that the District Court erred by granting summary judgment to the County as to Ordinance 99-18. We therefore reverse the court's order with respect to this ordinance as well. 24