Attorney General sends letter to Ocean City on matter of toplessness
The Worcester County State's Attorney has received a letter of advice from the office of the Attorney General about the application of Maryland's indecent exposure law.
The letter which officials say was asked for when the Worcester County State's Attorney's Office received a request from a woman who believed that it was her constitutional right to be bare-chested on Ocean City's beach says that "it is our view that Maryland courts would hold that prohibiting women from exposing their breast in public while allowing men to do so under the same circumstances does not violate the federal or State Constitution."
Ocean City officials passed an emergency ordinance on Saturday, June 10, to stop female toplessness in public areas say that they were delighted about the letter.
Mayor Rick Meehan says, "We are pleased to see the Attorney General's Office has advised that prohibiting topless women sunbathing is not a violation of equal protection. We have a responsibility to protect the rights of thousands of families who visit our beach and Boardwalk each summer season, and the letter of advice agreed with our position."
Worcester County States Attorney Beau Oglesby who was also satisfied with the advice said, "The Office of The Attorney General has provided me with a well-reasoned and comprehensive analysis of this legal question. This issue has statewide implications and unfortunately has created division and unrest in our community during our busiest time of the year. Individuals on both sides hold passionate and sincere beliefs in their positions. However, having reviewed and considered the Advice Letter, I agree with its conclusions. My Office will continue to work with the Ocean City Police Department and the Town of Ocean City as this issue develops further."
The advice letter mentions multiple court findings where the constitutionality of indecency statues applied to topless women, but not men, on the grounds that there are "real physical differences" between men and women.
Further it noted in United States vs. Biocic, "the important government interest is the widely recognized one of protecting the moral sensibilities of that substantial segment of society that still does not want to be exposed willy-nilly to public displays of various portions of their fellow citizens' anatomies that traditionally in this society have been regarded as erogenous zones. These still include (whether justifiably or not in the eyes of all) the female, but not the male, breast. "
