The Colorado Supreme Court has dealt another blow to the First Amendment, holding that public health concerns trump the First Amendment in cases involving bans on smoking.
\nCurious Theatre v. Colorado Department of Health and Public Environment<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

The Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act (which went into effect in 2006) prohibits indoor smoking of tobacco and other products\u00a0 in most public places, including theatres… even where the smoking is part of an actor's performance, or mandated by the text of a play.<\/p>\n

Curious Theatre and two other theatre companies sued the Department of Health, claiming that the ban on smoking onstage is an infringement of playwrights' producers' and actors' rights of free expression.\u00a0 The state agency countered with the argument that there are workable substitutes for actual cigarette smoke, which do not endanger public health.<\/p>\n

At trial, actors and other theatre professionals testified about the various problems\u00a0 with these substitutes, referring to one situation in which audiences laughed at the fake-smoke effect at a crucial dramatic moment.\u00a0 The Court however, was not swayed in favor of the free expression arguments.<\/p>\n

Today, the Colorado Supreme Court finally weighed in on the case.\u00a0 In the majority opinion,\u00a0 Justice Nathan Coats held that even assuming smoking can sometimes be protected conduct, the smoking ban can\u2019t be called unconstitutional because it is narrowly tailored for a specific purpose.\u00a0\u00a0 (protection of public health and safety).\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cLike the theatrical use of substitutes for virtually every other type of dangerous or illegal conduct”, Coats wrote, [artificial cigarette smoke] ” is capable of amply communicating to an audience an intended message.\u201d<\/p>\n

Justice Gregory Hobbs dissented, arguing that\u00a0 the ban is not, in fact,\u00a0 narrowly tailored because it bans the smoking of any plant matter, not just tobacco, which \u201crenders alternative means of the protected First Amendment expression untenable and even laughable”.<\/p>\n

The battle over smoking bans in theatre rages on in several other states.\u00a0 Perhaps before long, we'll see the U.S. Supreme Court weigh in on the issue.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Colorado Supreme Court has dealt another blow to the First Amendment, holding that public health concerns trump the First Amendment in cases involving bans on smoking. Curious Theatre v. Colorado Department of Health and Public Environment The Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act (which went into effect in 2006) prohibits indoor smoking of tobacco and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,16],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n