Will Utah follow Tennessee's lead by banning adult-themed performances in public?
One Utah lawmaker introduced a bill this week that aims to keep publicly accessible places family friendly amid rapidly changing norms about what that means.
State Rep. Colin Jack, R-St. George, publicly unveiled HB401, Adult-oriented Performance Amendments, on Monday. But he has been working on the bill ever since entering office in 2022.
'I want parents to have the comfort knowing that if they're out in public with their children, then they have a reasonable expectation to not be visually assaulted by an adult-oriented performance,' Jack told the Deseret News.
The bill, based on Tennessee legislation prohibiting 'adult cabaret performance,' would create a criminal offense for individuals engaged in an adult-oriented performance in a public place or in the presence of a minor.
An adult-oriented performance is defined as a live performance that is 'harmful to minors,' which includes:
The removal of clothing in a sexual manner.
Nudity.
The depiction of sexual conduct.
Sexually oriented dancing.
An act of lewdness as defined by a 2024 bill sponsored by Jack.
Under HB401, adult-oriented performances would be prohibited in any location where a substantial group of the public has access, including roads, parks, public recreation facilities, shopping centers, schools and certain businesses.
Individuals who engage in adult-oriented performances in public spaces that are accessible to minors can be charged with a class A misdemeanor if they are over 18 years old, or a class B misdemeanor if the individual is 16 or 17.
A subsequent violation of the law would be considered a third degree felony if the individual is at least 18 years old.
The bill would prohibit cities or counties in Utah from adopting or enforcing a conflicting ordinance.
Jack, who typically focuses on energy policy, sees his bill as an attempt to maintain family-friendly values in the Beehive State as other states expand 'family friendly' to include more behaviors.
'As parts of the country start to declare these things normal, I feel like certain elements are targeting Utah to try to normalize them here,' Jack said. 'And I think it shouldn't be.'
There were multiple activities engaged in during last year's pride parade in Salt Lake City that would have run afoul of his new bill, according to Jack.
But the enforcement of his bill, if it passes, will ultimately depend on which communities are willing to prosecute based on the complaints they receive, Jack said.
Critics have already begun to express worry that the bill unfairly targets certain groups with censorship.
Equality Utah, one of the largest LGBTQ activist groups in the state, confirmed they will speak with Jack about the bill on Wednesday.
House Minority Whip Sahara Hayes, D-Salt Lake City, said she is worried about how the bill could affect performances such as plays that parents could choose to bring their children to.
Hayes, who says she ran for office to advocate for LGBTQ+ youth, opposed Jack's 2024 lewdness bill — which was eventually signed into law — saying he cherrypicked the worst examples to justify a blanket ban that could have unintended consequences.
On Jack's current legislation, Hayes said that many of the acts prohibited by the bill are found in popular plays. As with R-rated movies, Hayes said the decision of what performances are viewed by a child should be left to the parent.
'I find it a frustrating bill in the first place because I do think it is trying to target drag through so many words. But I also think it's going to have ramifications in our performing arts sector in a really big way,' Hayes said.
The issue of controversial public performances was top of mind for Jack when he entered office in July of 2022.
Months earlier, HBO had filmed an episode of its drag queen reality show 'We're Here' in St. George's Town Square park.
The event sparked outcry among some city residents and led to the resignation of the city manager who approved the permits for the event.
In May 2023, drag performers sued St. George for denying a permit for a drag show. Following a court ruling, which allowed the drag show to move forward, the case ended with a private settlement in January 2025.
During his three sessions as a lawmaker, Jack has introduced at least one bill each session addressing his constituents' concerns about the kind of public events that should be allowed.
In 2023, Jack planned to introduce a similar bill to the one he is running this year. But with the model legislation in Tennessee being upheld in court, Jack opted for a bill that would require all events on public property with potential adult themes to have a sign warning people about it.
While the bill, HB329, garnered two dozen co-sponsors and passed the House with wide margins, it stalled in the Senate when concerns were brought up that it may have presented a liability for municipalities, Jack said.
In 2024, Jack successfully introduced HB244, creating new criminal penalties paired with an updated definition of lewdness involving a child, which would include things like simulating sexual acts with the intent to cause 'affront or alarm' to minors.
This year, a federal court ruling paved the way for Jack to pursue the policy he initially pushed for in response to the drag show in St. George.
In July, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Tennessee law banning 'adult cabaret performances' in public places.
This bill was a model for what Jack is trying to do with HB401 but Utah's version has more specific definitions, Jack said.
Now, with firmer legal footing, Jack expects his bill to move quickly through the Republican supermajority in the House and Senate this legislative session.
'There are those who feel like indecent material should be presented to minors. I don't, I don't think the majority of the Legislature feels that, I don't think the governor feels that, and I don't think the vast majority of Utahns feel that,' Jack said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Abbott vetoes Texas THC ban
Gov. Greg Abbott on Sunday night vetoed the THC ban bill pushed by his fellow Republicans in the Texas Legislature. Why it matters: The move secures the future of the state's multibillion-dollar hemp industry and keeps those who rely on legal THC products with more options — for now. It also articulates a divide among Texas conservatives in how they view cannabis and how to address its rising popularity. Between the lines: Abbott waited to act less than an hour before the midnight deadline to veto bills. Driving the news: Senate Bill 3 sought to ban the possession, sale and manufacture of all THC products — including consumable delta-8 THC which Texas lawmakers legalized in 2019. Context: Delta-8 THC is a minor chemical variant of the main psychoactive ingredient in traditional cannabis and provides lesser psychoactive effects. It can be coupled with CBD, another hemp-derived compound used for pain relief and mental wellness. In 2019, Abbott signed the Texas farm bill, which partly legalized products containing small amounts of hemp-derived delta-8 THC, including edibles, beverages, vapes and traditional bud. Catch up quick: Last year, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick vowed that Texas would once again criminalize all forms of THC after claiming products were being sold with "unlimited THC" and marketed to children with "life-threatening" consequences. The Senate passed SB 3 26-5 in March, and the House followed suit with an 87-54 vote in May. Flashback: Thousands of veterans, business owners and THC proponents sent Abbott letters urging him to veto the bill. The big picture: The move comes as Abbott this weekend expanded the state's medical marijuana program, opening it up for people with chronic pain, traumatic brain injury, Crohn's disease and in palliative care, and as more states have loosened cannabis restrictions in recent years.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Fetterman offers support for Trump decision to bomb Iran
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is offering support for President Trump's decision to bomb Iran, standing out from a number of other Democrats who have criticized the military action. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' Fetterman wrote in a post on X that linked to a statement from Trump announcing the decision. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities,' Fetterman continued. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' Fetterman since Hamas launched an attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 has been a vocal supporter of Israel, and has at times criticized his own party over the Middle East. His remarks in the immediate aftermath of the bombing campaign, as a result, are unsurprising. But they stood apart from other Democrats who criticized Trump's decision as unconstitutional. For example, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) criticized Trump for vowing to bring peace to the Middle East but failing, saying he had 'misled the country about his intensions.' 'The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm's way,' Jeffries wrote in a statement. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) both criticized the strikes as unconstitutional. Fetterman, however, tied himself to Trump by retweeting the president's Truth Social message announcing the attacks on the three nuclear sites in Iran. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump posted on Truth Social. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Republicans line up behind Trump after strike on Iran — with few detractors
Republicans on Capitol Hill quickly lined up behind President Trump after he announced that the U.S. conducted a strike on three Iranian nuclear facilities, a strong show of support for the White House with few detractors inside the GOP. Trump announced on Truth Social just before 8 p.m. EDT on Saturday that the U.S. 'completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran,' including Fordow, the nuclear site hidden in a mountain south of Tehran. He is scheduled to address the nation from the White House at 10 p.m. Republican leaders in the House and Senate backed the action, which had become a debate of sorts in Washington — especially among GOP — since Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities earlier this month in what it called a 'pre-emptive' attack. Live updates: US bombs Iranian nuclear sites, Trump to address nation 'The military operations in Iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote in a statement on X. 'The President gave Iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but Iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement. President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision, and clarity.' 'The President's decisive action prevents the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, which chants 'Death to America,' from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet,' he added. 'This is America First policy in action. God bless our brave men and women in uniform – the most lethal fighting force on the planet – as we pray for their safe return home. May God bless America.' Johnson was briefed on the strike beforehand, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote in a statement with X: 'I stand with President Trump.' 'The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing 'death to America' and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs' misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped,' he said. 'As we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), similarly, backed Trump after the strike and applauded him for making the 'right call.' 'Iran has waged a war of terror against the United States for 46 years. We could never allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. God bless our brave troops. President Trump made the right call and the ayatollahs should recall his warning not to target Americans,' Cotton wrote on X. 'As I have said multiple times recently, I regret that Iran has brought the world to this point,' Crawford echoed in a statement. 'That said, I am thankful President Trump understood that the red line — articulated by President of both parties for decades — was real. The United States and our allies, including Israel, are making it clear that the world would never accept Iran's development of a nuclear weapon.' While the majority of Republicans backed Trump in the wake of the strike, there were some GOP detractors on Capitol Hill. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has been advocating for the U.S. to avoid intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict, wrote on X minutes after Trump announced the offensive: 'This is not Constitutional.' Massie helped lead a bipartisan war powers resolution to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Middle East dispute. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) suggested that the move was unconstitutional. 'While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional. I look forward to his remarks tonight,' he wrote on X. Trump's decision to strike a trio of Iranian nuclear sites came after a week of debate on Capitol Hill over whether the U.S. should take action in Iran after Israel launched an attack on Iran, prompting a back-and-forth between the two countries. Trump on Thursday said he would decide whether to take action within the next two weeks. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiation that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go in the next two weeks,' Trump said in the statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. The big question had been whether the U.S. would deploy a large bomb known as a 'bunker buster' to strike the Fordow facility, which is underground. While some lawmakers advocated for the move, others — including some of the president's most vocal supporters on the right-flank — pushed against the U.S. directly getting involved in the conflict. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), for example, said 'Me and my district support President Trump and his MAGA agenda, it's what we voted for in November, and foreign wars weren't a part of it.' On Saturday night, she offered prayers for the safety of U.S. troops and Americans in the Middle East. 'Let us pray that we are not attacked by terrorists on our homeland after our border was open for the past 4 years and over 2 Million gotaways came in.🙏 Let us pray for peace. 🙏,' she added. But across the GOP conferences on Capitol Hill, Republicans were quick to back the move by the president. 'Our commander-in-chief has made a deliberate —and correct— decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime,' Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) wrote in a statement on X. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies and stability for the middle-east. Well-done to our military personnel. You're the best!' House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the No. 3 House Republican, said Trump 'was right then, and he is right today: NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE.' 'A nuclear Iran posed a threat to the Middle East and to the world. @POTUS has been consistent that this dangerous regime should NEVER possess a nuclear weapon,' he added in a statement on X. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
