Montana Pride joins lawsuit against drag ban bill claiming permit for Helena event denied
A Montana LGBTQ+ organization claims the City of Helena withheld the application for its annual pride event citing the recently passed bill banning drag performances on public property.
Montana Pride, which has hosted an annual pride celebration in the state’s capital city for eight years, joined a lawsuit earlier this week questioning the constitutionality of House Bill 359, which banned any drag performances in public spaces, and was signed into law this session. It also bans drag performances in schools and libraries and features consequences for private businesses.
The organization claims the city is denying the permits because of HB 359, however the city says a final decision has not been made on the permits. Pride events have gone forward, including with drag performances, in other cities in the state with no issue, but an attorney for the plaintiffs said with the law being new and broad, people are still trying to understand how it applies.
“The City of Helena denied these permits because the planned events included drag performances,” said the amended complaint filed Monday.
City of Helena spokesperson Jacob Garcin said in an email Wednesday the special event permit application from Montana Pride has not been denied and is still being reviewed. He said there is no set timeline for the review to be completed.
“City staff met with the event organizer last week to discuss all aspects of the application, which included HB 359 and how it would impact the event,” he said. “But with any event this size, there are usually many aspects to discuss during the permit review process.”
[…]
He said HB 359 is “more of an attack on transgender, intersex, nonbinary and Two-Spirit people,” citing the the event Jawort eventually relocated after the library cancelled.
“The event was cancelled because people feared that she would be perceived as in drag, where she wasn’t she was going to be dressed as her authentic self as a trans Two-Spirit woman,” he said. “So that opens the door to all sorts of possibilities where a trans person can find themselves liable.”
Upper Seven Law attorney Constance Van Kley told the Daily Montanan that because the bill has broad implications, people are starting to see expanding interpretations of it.
“Yes, Missoula Pride went forward, but now the bill has been on the books a little bit longer, people are starting to read it more closely and pay more attention to it,” she said. “Over time, the breadth of the law is being realized.”
The bill was written to target the LGBTQ+ community, she said, but has language that impacts far beyond. She said any entity that receives state funding isn’t allowed to put on performances, including films, that have any sexual content whatsoever, even if the audience is made up of adults — which could mean a theater could run into issues playing a PG-13 movie.
“When you have law that is vague and is broad, it just means that it’s going to be enforced in potentially discriminatory and certainly selective ways,” she said. “I don’t think that the City of Helena is out to get Pride. I think that they’re probably basing their interpretation on a good faith reading of the law; I think that just indicates a problem with the law.”