Trying To Ban Drag. First They Have To Define It – By Kaleigh Rogers (FiveThirtyEight) / Mar 14, 2023
A drag queen battle has emerged at many statehouses this year, but not the kind of lip-sync battle royale you might see on “RuPaul’s Drag Race.” So far this legislative session, Republican lawmakers in at least 16 states have introduced bills that seek to restrict or criminalize drag performances. These bills range from restricting state funding from being used for drag shows to banning Sunday drag brunches. In Tennessee, one such bill limiting drag shows in public has already passed the legislature and been signed into law (by a governor who once wore drag).
Critics of these bills say they are a blatant attack on the LGBTQ community, could put trans individuals at risk and in some cases are unconstitutional. A close reading reveals part of what makes these bills both dangerous and legally dubious: Drag is not easy to define. FiveThirtyEight analyzed language in 29 anti-drag bills from 16 states and found lawmakers have struggled to differentiate between a drag queen and, say, a performer in a Shakespearean play or a trans person who also happens to be a singer. Different amendments have been added to try to narrow the bills to avoid running afoul of the First Amendment, but those changes often muddy the water by using subjective language, which will leave local law enforcement and judges to decide what is and isn’t allowed. Meanwhile, the justification for these bills echoes past eras of heightened LGBTQ discrimination and prejudice.
The variety of definitions in these bills raises a pivotal question: If you can’t explain what you’re trying to ban, should you really be trying to ban it?
