A Senate panel on Tuesday endorsed a bill intended to regulate "adult-oriented performances."
Senate Bill 43, by Sen. Gary Stubblefield, R-Branch, passed the Committee on City, County, and Local Affairs after heavy amendments in the House. The bill, which originally aimed to regulate "drag performances," heads to the full Senate for further action.
After drawing crowds to earlier committee meetings in the House and Senate and sparking opposition from Democratic lawmakers on the floors of both chambers, Stubblefield's bill passed the Senate panel Monday with little fanfare. No one testified for or against the legislation.
While presenting his bill, Stubblefield said the amendments would expand protections for children while also making the legislation more resilient to potential court challenges.
The amended bill defines an "adult-oriented performance" as a show "intended to appeal to the prurient interest and that features a person who appears in a state of nudity or is semi-nude; the purposeful exposure, whether complete or partial, of a specific anatomical area, or prosthetic genitalia or breasts; or a specific sexual activity."
The legislation would bar an "adult-oriented performance" from taking place on public property, admitting minors or being "funded in whole or in part with public funds."
Stubblefield noted the original bill did not prevent "sexual performances" from admitting minors nor did it prevent "drag shows" from receiving taxpayer dollars. Stubblefield said he had discussed the bill with attorneys including the state attorney general to ensure it would withstand possible objections in court.
"None of us like to pass a bill that's going to get struck down by a judge and not help any children at all," he said.
Attorney General Tim Griffin said in a written statement provided by a spokesman earlier this month that the latest amendment was needed to "align the bill with First Amendment case law."
Supporters of the bill have said the legislation would address concerns raised by constituents and was needed to protect the innocence of children.
During past meetings, opponents criticized the bill for having confusing language and raised concerns about how it could limit the First Amendment rights of performers.
When speaking against the bill on the House floor, minority leader Tippi McCullough, of Little Rock, said the legislation contained undefined terms -- including "prurient interest" and "public property" -- that could influence its enforcement.
McCullough said she was confused about the criminal or civil penalties the bill might carry and how the proposed law could affect artistic endeavors such as the musical "Chicago." She noted Arkansas already has statutes that regulate obscene material.
McCullough echoed many concerns voiced during a Feb. 1 meeting of the House Committee on City, County, and Local Affairs. During the meeting, lawmakers endorsed the bill and the amendment that shifted the legislation to restrict "adult-oriented performances."