SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Yasmine Nicole performs in drag during a drag show and story hour held at East Tennessee State University in Johnson City, Tennessee on Friday March 31, 2023. The event was held in protest to the passing of legislation that would go into effect the following day that restricts locations where drag performances can take place along with other parts of the bill which are considered trans-phobic.
(Photo by Mike Belleme for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
'Victory for Free Speech': Federal Judge Strikes Down Tennessee Anti-Drag Law as Unconstitutional
"Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry," said the group who challenged the statute.
Jun 03, 2023
A federal judge on Friday evening ruled that Tennessee's anti-drag show law—the first of its kind in the nation signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee earlier this year after approval by the GOP-controlled state legislature—represented an unconstitutional attack on free speech.
The 70-page ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Thomas L. Parker found that the law was "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad," making it a clear violation of the free protections in the First Amendment.
"We Won!" declared Friends of George's, the non-profit performance group in the state who had challenged the law.
\u201cWE WON! Judge Parker has declared Tennessee's anti-drag law unconstitutional! Friends of George's would like to thank Brice Timmons and Melissa Stewart at Donati Law and all who have stood by us during this fight! #standwithfriendsofgeorges #pride #dragisnotacrime\u201d— Friends of George's (@Friends of George's) 1685795100
While the word "drag" or phrase "drag show" did not appear in the statute, Judge Parker said the examples offered by the defenders of the law during the hearing of the case exhibited clearly who and what the law was targeting and that it therefore encouraged "discriminatory enforcement" by the state.
"There is no question that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment," states the ruling. "But there is a difference between material that is 'obscene' in the vernacular, and material that is 'obscene' under the law."
"Simply put," it continues, "no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit—but not obscene—speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech."
\u201cLast night, Tennessee\u2019s extreme drag show ban was struck down and ruled unconstitutional by a Trump-appointed federal judge. \n\nTried to tell my Republican colleagues when they introduced it on the House floor, but yet again they had to FIND OUT. \n\nHappy Pride, y\u2019all!! \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08\u201d— Rep. Justin Jones (@Rep. Justin Jones) 1685805066
In a statement on Saturday, Friends of George's said the ruling "represents a triumph over hate."
"Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry," said the group, based in Memphis.
Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression & education programs for PEN America, also celebrated the ruling, calling it a "necessary victory for free speech" in Tennessee.
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A federal judge on Friday evening ruled that Tennessee's anti-drag show law—the first of its kind in the nation signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee earlier this year after approval by the GOP-controlled state legislature—represented an unconstitutional attack on free speech.
The 70-page ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Thomas L. Parker found that the law was "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad," making it a clear violation of the free protections in the First Amendment.
"We Won!" declared Friends of George's, the non-profit performance group in the state who had challenged the law.
\u201cWE WON! Judge Parker has declared Tennessee's anti-drag law unconstitutional! Friends of George's would like to thank Brice Timmons and Melissa Stewart at Donati Law and all who have stood by us during this fight! #standwithfriendsofgeorges #pride #dragisnotacrime\u201d— Friends of George's (@Friends of George's) 1685795100
While the word "drag" or phrase "drag show" did not appear in the statute, Judge Parker said the examples offered by the defenders of the law during the hearing of the case exhibited clearly who and what the law was targeting and that it therefore encouraged "discriminatory enforcement" by the state.
"There is no question that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment," states the ruling. "But there is a difference between material that is 'obscene' in the vernacular, and material that is 'obscene' under the law."
"Simply put," it continues, "no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit—but not obscene—speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech."
\u201cLast night, Tennessee\u2019s extreme drag show ban was struck down and ruled unconstitutional by a Trump-appointed federal judge. \n\nTried to tell my Republican colleagues when they introduced it on the House floor, but yet again they had to FIND OUT. \n\nHappy Pride, y\u2019all!! \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08\u201d— Rep. Justin Jones (@Rep. Justin Jones) 1685805066
In a statement on Saturday, Friends of George's said the ruling "represents a triumph over hate."
"Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry," said the group, based in Memphis.
Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression & education programs for PEN America, also celebrated the ruling, calling it a "necessary victory for free speech" in Tennessee.
From Your Site Articles
- Tennessee Exposes Swift-Moving Fascism Within the GOP ›
- 'See You in Court,' Say Rights Groups After Tennessee Bans Care for Trans Youth ›
Related Articles Around the Web
A federal judge on Friday evening ruled that Tennessee's anti-drag show law—the first of its kind in the nation signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee earlier this year after approval by the GOP-controlled state legislature—represented an unconstitutional attack on free speech.
The 70-page ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Thomas L. Parker found that the law was "unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad," making it a clear violation of the free protections in the First Amendment.
"We Won!" declared Friends of George's, the non-profit performance group in the state who had challenged the law.
\u201cWE WON! Judge Parker has declared Tennessee's anti-drag law unconstitutional! Friends of George's would like to thank Brice Timmons and Melissa Stewart at Donati Law and all who have stood by us during this fight! #standwithfriendsofgeorges #pride #dragisnotacrime\u201d— Friends of George's (@Friends of George's) 1685795100
While the word "drag" or phrase "drag show" did not appear in the statute, Judge Parker said the examples offered by the defenders of the law during the hearing of the case exhibited clearly who and what the law was targeting and that it therefore encouraged "discriminatory enforcement" by the state.
"There is no question that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment," states the ruling. "But there is a difference between material that is 'obscene' in the vernacular, and material that is 'obscene' under the law."
"Simply put," it continues, "no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit—but not obscene—speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech."
\u201cLast night, Tennessee\u2019s extreme drag show ban was struck down and ruled unconstitutional by a Trump-appointed federal judge. \n\nTried to tell my Republican colleagues when they introduced it on the House floor, but yet again they had to FIND OUT. \n\nHappy Pride, y\u2019all!! \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08\u201d— Rep. Justin Jones (@Rep. Justin Jones) 1685805066
In a statement on Saturday, Friends of George's said the ruling "represents a triumph over hate."
"Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry," said the group, based in Memphis.
Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression & education programs for PEN America, also celebrated the ruling, calling it a "necessary victory for free speech" in Tennessee.
From Your Site Articles
- Tennessee Exposes Swift-Moving Fascism Within the GOP ›
- 'See You in Court,' Say Rights Groups After Tennessee Bans Care for Trans Youth ›
Related Articles Around the Web
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
LATEST NEWS
Trump-Appointed Judge Tosses Lawsuit Accusing Pro-Palestinian Groups of Being Fronts for Hamas
Judge Rossie Alston Jr. ruled the plaintiffs had failed to prove the groups provided "ongoing, continuous, systematic, and material support for Hamas and its affiliates."
Aug 16, 2025
A federal judge appointed in 2019 by US President Donald Trump has dismissed a lawsuit filed against pro-Palestinian organizations that alleged they were fronts for the terrorist organization Hamas.
In a ruling issued on Friday, Judge Rossie Alston Jr. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found that the plaintiffs who filed the case against the pro-Palestine groups had not sufficiently demonstrated a clear link between the groups and Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.
The plaintiffs in the case—consisting of seven Americans and two Israelis—were all victims of the Hamas attack that killed an estimated 1,200 people, including more than 700 Israeli civilians.
They alleged that the pro-Palestinian groups—including National Students for Justice in Palestine, WESPAC Foundation, and Americans for Justice in Palestine Educational Foundation—provided material support to Hamas that directly led to injuries they suffered as a result of the October 7 attack.
This alleged support for Hamas, the plaintiffs argued, violated both the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Alien Tort Statute.
However, after examining all the evidence presented by the plaintiffs, Alston found they had not proven their claim that the organizations in question provide "ongoing, continuous, systematic, and material support for Hamas and its affiliates."
Specifically, Alston said that the claims made by the plaintiffs "are all very general and conclusory and do not specifically relate to the injuries" that they suffered in the Hamas attack.
"Although plaintiffs conclude that defendants have aided and abetted Hamas by providing it with 'material support despite knowledge of Hamas' terrorist activity both before, during, and after its October 7 terrorist attack,' plaintiffs do not allege that any planning, preparation, funding, or execution of the October 7, 2023 attack or any violations of international law by Hamas occurred in the United States," Alston emphasized. "None of the direct attackers are alleged to be citizens of the United States."
Alston was unconvinced by the plaintiffs' claims that the pro-Palestinian organizations "act as Hamas' public relations division, recruiting domestic foot soldiers to disseminate Hamas’s propaganda," and he similarly dismissed them as "vague and conclusory."
He then said that the plaintiffs did not establish that these "public relations" activities purportedly done on behalf of Hamas had "aided and abetted Hamas in carrying out the specific October 7, 2023 attack (or subsequent or continuing Hamas violations) that caused the Israeli Plaintiffs' injuries."
Alston concluded by dismissing the plaintiffs' case without prejudice, meaning they are free to file an amended lawsuit against the plaintiffs within 30 days of the judge's ruling.
Trump Tries to Spin Failed Putin Peace Summit as Critics Label It a 'Self-Own'
"Putin got one hell of a photo op out of Trump," wrote one critic.
Aug 16, 2025
US President Donald Trump on Saturday morning tried to put his best spin on a Friday summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin that yielded neither a cease-fire agreement nor a comprehensive peace deal to end the war in Ukraine.
Writing on his Truth Social page, the president took a victory lap over the summit despite coming home completely empty-handed when he flew back from Alaska on Friday night.
"A great and very successful day in Alaska!" Trump began. "The meeting with President Vladimir Putin of Russia went very well, as did a late night phone call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine, and various European Leaders, including the highly respected Secretary General of NATO."
Trump then pivoted to saying that he was fine with not obtaining a cease-fire agreement, even though he said just days before that he'd impose "severe consequences" on Russia if it did not agree to one.
"It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Cease-fire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," Trump said. "President Zelenskyy will be coming to DC, the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon. If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people's lives will be saved."
While Trump did his best to put a happy face on the summit, many critics contended it was nothing short of a debacle for the US president.
Writing in The New Yorker, Susan Glasser argued that the entire summit with Putin was a "self-own of embarrassing proportions," given that he literally rolled out the red carpet for his Russian counterpart and did not achieve any success in bringing the war to a close.
"Putin got one hell of a photo op out of Trump, and still more time on the clock to prosecute his war against the 'brotherly' Ukrainian people, as he had the chutzpah to call them during his remarks in Alaska," she wrote. "The most enduring images from Anchorage, it seems, will be its grotesque displays of bonhomie between the dictator and his longtime American admirer."
She also noted that Trump appeared to shift the entire burden of ending the war onto Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and he even said after the Putin summit that "it's really up to President Zelenskyy to get it done."
This led Glasser to comment that "if there's one unwavering Law of Trump, this is it: Whatever happens, it is never, ever, his fault."
Glasser wasn't the only critic to offer a scathing assessment of the summit. The Economist blasted Trump in an editorial about the meeting, which it labeled a "gift" to Putin. The magazine also contrasted the way that Trump treated Putin during his visit to American soil with the way that he treated Zelenskyy during an Oval Office meeting earlier this year.
"The honors for Mr. Putin were in sharp contrast to the public humiliation that Mr. Trump and his advisers inflicted on Mr. Zelenskyy during his first visit to the White House earlier this year," they wrote. "Since then relations with Ukraine have improved, but Mr. Trump has often been quick to blame it for being invaded; and he has proved strangely indulgent with Mr. Putin."
Michael McFaul, an American ambassador to Russia under former President Barack Obama, was struck by just how much effort went into holding a summit that accomplished nothing.
"Summits usually have deliverables," he told The Atlantic. "This meeting had none... I hope that they made some progress towards next steps in the peace process. But there is no evidence of that yet."
Blue No Matter Who?: Jeffries Slammed for 'Gutless' Refusal to Endorse Zohran Mamdani
Mamdani won the House minority leader's district by double digits in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary, prompting one critic to ask, "Do those voters not matter?"
Aug 15, 2025
Zohran Mamdani is the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, but Democratic U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries—whose district Mamdani won by double digits—is still refusing to endorse him, "blue-no-matter-who" mantra be damned.
Criticism of Jeffries (D-N.Y.) mounted Friday after he sidestepped questions about whether he agreed with the democratic socialist Mamdani's proposed policies—including a rent freeze, universal public transportation, and free supermarkets—during an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box" earlier this week.
"He's going to have to demonstrate to a broader electorate—including in many of the neighborhoods that I represent in Brooklyn—that his ideas can actually be put into reality," Jeffries said in comments that drew praise from scandal-ridden incumbent Democratic Mayor Eric Adams, who opted to run independently. Another Democrat, disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, is also running on his own.
"Shit like this does more to undermine faith in the institution of the Democratic Party than anything Mamdani might ever say or do," Amanda Litman, co-founder and executive director of Run For Something—a political action group that recruits young, diverse progressives to run for down-ballot offices—said on social media in response to Jeffries' refusal to endorse Mamdani.
"He won the primary! Handily!!" Litman added. "Does that electorate not count? Do those voters not matter?"
Writer and professor Roxane Gay noted on Bluesky that "Jeffries is an establishment Democrat. He will always work for the establishment. He is not a disruptor or innovator or individual thinker. Within that framework, his gutless behavior toward Mamdani or any progressive candidate makes a lot of sense."
City College of New York professor Angus Johnston said on the social network Bluesky that "even if Jeffries does eventually endorse Mamdani, the only response available to Mamdani next year if someone asks him whether he's endorsing Jeffries is three seconds of incredulous laughter."
Jeffries has repeatedly refused to endorse Mamdani, a staunch supporter of Palestinian liberation and vocal opponent of Israel's genocidal annihilation of Gaza. The minority leader—whose all-time top campaign donor is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, according to AIPAC Tracker—has especially criticized Mamdani's use of the phrase "globalize the intifada," a call for universal justice and liberation.
Mamdani's stance doesn't seem to have harmed his support among New York's Jewish voters, who according to recent polling prefer him over any other mayoral candidate by a double-digit margin.
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.