SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court last week upheld laws requiring escorts and sexually oriented businesses to have licenses in every city they work in.
In a ruling handed down Thursday night, Utah’s top court sided with Salt Lake City prosecutors in an escort’s legal challenge to licensing requirements.
Karlie Kidd was cited by Salt Lake City police for not having a license when she showed up to the Grand America Hotel and met an undercover police officer. Kidd, however, was licensed in nearby Midvale City.
Because state law authorizes any municipality to impose licensing requirements on employees of sexually oriented businesses, the resulting regulatory scheme requires escorts to obtain licenses in each jurisdiction in which they seek to operate.
On appeal from her conviction, Kidd argued that the imposition of multiple licensing requirements violates her First Amendment and Equal Protection rights.
The Utah Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Kidd did not preserve her Equal Protection claim in the district court, and she did not adequately brief her First Amendment challenge on appeal.
Industry attorney Lawrence Walters told XBIZ that the take aways from the decision are as follows:
“Escort activity is legal and licensed in many U.S. jurisdictions. Escorts must follow all of the hyper-technical licensure requirements in each jurisdiction, or they risk prosecution for escorting without a license," Walters said.
“Next, in any constitutional challenge, the legal briefing is critical. All challenges must be supported by specific citation to case law and legal principles," he said.
“Also, the court did not resolve the merits of the constitutional challenges in this case, which leaves these arguments open for the next litigant. No ruling is better than a bad ruling, in a case like this," Walters said.
“Finally, many courts continue to be unreceptive to legal challenges brought by sex workers. Lawyers representing these clients are often held to a higher standard than the government.”
Walters noted that Kidd’s appellate attorney in the case likely met a stubborn legal panel.
“Andy McCollough is a fine lawyer who may have simply run into a hostile court,” Walters said.
