Bikini clad baristas forced to cover up
What happened:
An innovative cafe in Washington state combined hot coffee with hot women, and it was a hit.
The baristas wore bikinis to work, and served coffee to their (probably mostly male) customers.
We first talked about this back in March 2018, when the bikini-wearing business owner sued the town for passing an ordinance that banned businesses with scantily-clad employees.
While the lawsuit played out, the courts blocked the town from enforcing the code, allowing the women to continue wearing whatever they wanted to work.
Unfortunately now the suit has been thrown out. The courts upheld the town ordinance, which means these baristas will have to cover up.
What this means:
On the one hand, it’s easy to take a shot at the government for being the fun-police. Who are the prudes running this town that they can’t put up with a little sex appeal at a local cafe?
But more seriously, this is just another unnecessary restriction on economic and personal freedom. Why can government officials ruin a business, just because they have a personal problem with it?
And who are they saving– the customers and workers seemed fine with the arrangement.
There was no problem here, and the government created one.
Supreme Court will hear appeal of New York City gun transport ban
What happened:
New York City is extremely restrictive when it comes to firearms.
You need a permit just to keep a gun in your home, and transport it to one of seven firing ranges in the city.
And that permit is good for absolutely nothing else. You can’t carry it concealed, and you can’t even transport it outside of the city.
Residents found that out the hard way. They got in trouble for transporting their firearms from New York City to another New York home they own outside of the city.
We first alerted you to this case last March when the NYC gun owners sued. But the courts ruled that these restrictions were permissible under the Second Amendment right to bear arms, and did not restrict citizens right to travel.
Now the US Supreme Court has agreed to take the case in its next term.
What this means:
Now New York City is scrambling to change their laws in order to make the case moot…
They realize that these absurd laws could be struck down by the highest court in the country. And that precedent would strengthen gun rights nationwide.
Which shows that they know how far they reached past legitimate regulations of firearms. But the anti-gunners just didn’t care until they had more to lose.
Doctors sue over Texas ban on dispensing medication
What happened:
You trust me to perform eye surgery, but not dispense eye-drops?
That’s what a Texas eye doctor asks in a suit to overturn a Texas ban on dispensing medication from her clinic.
Texas is one of only a handful of states which forces doctors to send patients to the pharmacy to fill their prescriptions.
What this means:
Only 8 of about 65,000 doctors in Texas have waivers that allow them to fill the medications they prescribe. That’s because they are so rural that it would be an absurd burden for their patients to get to a pharmacy.
But that means that hundreds of thousands or even millions of other patients are being needlessly inconvenienced with pharmacy visits, when they could just get medication straight from the doctor.
Some of these people have conditions which make this hassle even more burdensome.
And the regulation adds another middleman which means increased costs.
Time to let doctors do their job.
Floridians can grow front-yard gardens again
What happened:
Can you think of a much more basic freedom than growing your own food?
Yet local ordinances in many Florida towns banned property owners from growing vegetables in their front yards.
One couple sued, but was ultimately shut down by the courts. The Florida Supreme Court declined to take the case.
But now the Governor of Florida just signed a law that specifically prohibits and nullifies local ordinances that regulate growing vegetables on your own property.
What this means:
Private property exists, even at the local level.
There is no reason why town governments should be able to restrict the use of your property for the most elemental need of human beings: to produce food.
Good for Florida for protecting citizens from local tyrants.
