Sex: Davenport and Henry Supposedly Team Up w/ Retail Distributor to Battle the 11th Court to No Avail

Posted: August 13, 2016 by Quintin Goynes in Shit Sucks News
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Sex Dildos Allowed in GA, FL, or AL?

Quintin Goynes | UltraVulgarSUPERfiend
Copyright: <a href='http://www.123rf.com/profile_bugphai'>bugphai / 123RF Stock Photo</a>

drugs man fists in strained chains

Ever since Alabama put its foot down on the purchase and selling of sex toys and novelty items, the people of Georgia have been at their knees. Frankly, an abundance of adults use dildos and fake pussies to please themselves , as well as their mates. However, the court ruled that the protection of someone’s right to purchase times, as such, is ‘not’ protected by the Constitution. According to sources, multiple sclerosis patient, Melissa Davenport and exotic artist, Marshal Henry attended the hearing to defend their rights under the 14th Amendment. To their demise, the court ruled ‘not in their favor’.

Initially, Flanigan’s and Inserection made the proposal to furnish sex toys and novelties to Sandy Springs, Georgia; however, their ‘legal challenge’ was disputed by the 11th Circuit panel; Unfortunately, the 11th Appellate court has acquired jurisdiction of AL, GA, and FL.:

https://www.123rf.com

Appellate Court Decision

FLANIGAN’S ENTERPRISES, INC. OF GEORGIA,

FANTASTIC VISUALS, LLC,; Plaintiffs – Appellants,

MELISSA DAVENPORT, MARSHALL G. HENRY; Intervenors – Plaintiffs – Appellants,

versus

CITY OF SANDY SPRINGS, GEORGIA

 

Copyright: <a href='http://www.123rf.com/profile_bugphai'>bugphai / 123RF Stock Photo</a>

romantic evening with the glass of wine

“The appellants contend that they have a fundamental right to engage in acts of private, consensual sexual intimacy and that the ordinance burdens this right … The city responds that this claim is foreclosed by our prior holding in Williams IV.”

In reference, Lawrence Williams v. Morgan, 478 F.3d 1316 (11th Cir. 2007) represents the appellate court upholding an Alabama law forbidding the sales of obscene (i.e., explicit) sex toys and novelty items. The appellate court ruled based on the argument, “… unless and until our holding in ‘Williams IV’ is overruled en banc, or by the Supreme Court, we are bound to it …”

This is the ruling: no explicit sales in the ‘Dirty

Copyright: <a href='http://www.123rf.com/profile_fotografersu'>fotografersu / 123RF Stock Photo</a>

New Year’s embellishment

South’ because the local court said so. The natural right to buy what you want, as an adult, is not the case here; the court systems are here the support the best ideas that relate to raising a responsible community. As a result, the appellate court panel has shown its face again as a true supporter of this particular goal. Unfortunately, chosen consumers have to suffer, which a part of certain beliefs. Remember, the real issue might pertain to you being in the wrong place, at the right time. Don’t forget to vote for marijuana, though!

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *