ACLU Says Massachusetts Criminal Ban on Tattooing Violates First Amendment
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, April 28, 1999
BOSTON -- The ACLU of Massachusetts today filed a civil rights law suit in Suffolk Superior Court challenging the state's virtual ban on tattooing as a violation of First Amendment free speech rights.
The suit was filed on behalf of two Martha's Vineyard men, one a tattoo artist, the other a person who would like to receive a tattoo in Massachusetts.
Massachusetts, along with North Carolina and Oklahoma, is one of three states that makes tattooing a crime. The Massachusetts statute makes it a crime punishable by up to one year in jail or a $300 fine for any person other than a licensed physician to "mark the body of any other person by means of tattooing."
"Tattooing is a form of art and a form of expression," said Harvey A. Schwartz, the ACLU attorney for the two men. "Tattooing has as much right to Constitutional protection as what you see on museum walls. The government can certainly regulate it for health reasons, but it can't just ban this form of expression."
The ACLU's lawsuit asks the court to declare that the Massachusetts statute violates the First Amendment and the Massachusetts Constitution.
The suit was filed on behalf of Stephan A. Lanphear and John R. Parkinson.
Stay informed
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
Related Content
- Press ReleaseMay 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Mahmoud Khalil To Appear In Louisiana Immigration Court On May 22. Explore Press Release.Mahmoud Khalil to Appear in Louisiana Immigration Court on May 22
WHAT: One day after the Columbia University commencement ceremony where Mahmoud Khalil was supposed to be walking with his peers, Mr. Khalil will instead be attending his immigration court hearing in Jena, LA. Virtual access is not guaranteed, but there are approximately 20 seats in the courtroom. Mr. Khalil’s legal team has requested the court grant either virtual or in-person access to interested press and public who wish to view these proceedings. The immigration court judge has not ruled on the motion. Following the hearing, his lawyers will be available for questions. WHEN: Thursday, May 22 (Exact timing yet to be announced) WHERE: Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center (830 Pine Hill Road, Jena, Louisiana) BACKGROUND: On March 8, the Trump administration and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illegally arrested and detained Mr. Khalil in direct retaliation for his advocacy for Palestinian human rights at Columbia University. Shortly after, DHS transferred him 1400 miles away to a Louisiana detention facility — ripping him away from his wife and legal counsel. While stuck in detention, he was forced to miss the birth of his first child. It later came out that they did not have a warrant. At his last immigration hearing in April, in what appeared to be a pre-written decision, a judge ruled that Mr. Khalil was removable under U.S. immigration law — despite a lack of evidence. In May, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey’s decision that Khalil’s case should be heard in New Jersey, where he was located when his habeas petition was filed. A decision on bail is outstanding.Court Case: Khalil v. TrumpAffiliates: New York, New Jersey - Press ReleaseMay 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Rümeysa Öztürk To Be Freed From Detention As Case Proceeds. Explore Press Release.Rümeysa Öztürk To Be Freed From Detention as Case Proceeds
BURLINGTON, Vt. – A federal court today ordered the release of Rümeysa Öztürk, a former Fulbright scholar and current Tufts University Ph.D. student researching child development. This comes more than six weeks after the Trump administration arrested and detained her because of an op-ed she co-authored in The Tufts Daily. With this ruling, she will be able to return to her Massachusetts community and continue her studies while the case proceeds. “I am relieved and ecstatic that Rümeysa has been ordered released. Unfortunately, it is 45 days too late. She has been imprisoned all these days for simply writing an op-ed that called for human rights and dignity for the people in Palestine. When did speaking up against oppression become a crime? When did speaking up against genocide become something to be imprisoned for?” said Mahsa Khanbabai of Khanbabai Immigration Law. “I am thankful that the courts have been ruling in favor of detained political prisoners like Rümeysa. The public plays an important role in upholding our constitutional rights. Please continue to speak up for democracy and civil rights in every space including our elected offices, our universities, and our halls of justice.” Ms. Öztürk, who has not been accused of any crime, was taken by plainclothes ICE agents in Somerville, Massachusetts on March 25. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s attorney was unable to locate her as ICE quickly and quietly moved her to three separate locations in three different states — including Vermont — before sending her to Louisiana. “From the moment a swarm of ICE agents abducted Ms. Öztürk in broad daylight, the government has spared no effort to evade accountability and deny her due process. Today, the court delivered reprieve and justice — for Ms. Öztürk, who should not have spent even one minute incarcerated, let alone the six weeks she has endured in deplorable conditions at an ICE detention center in Louisiana,” said Mudassar Toppa, staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal non-profit and clinic at CUNY School of Law. “Make no mistake, the government tried to punish Ms. Öztürk for lending her pen to advocacy for Palestinian human rights and the court's decision today is not only a victory for Ms. Öztürk, but everyone who wishes to advocate for Palestinian human rights without fear of retaliation. We look forward to continuing the legal fight to vindicate all of her constitutional rights.” Ms. Öztürk has detailed her harrowing night being shuttled across New England with little food after a day of fasting for Ramadan. She describes being shackled by her feet and stomach and then driven to different sites for meetings with unidentified men, some in uniform and some not. One group so unsettled her, Ms. Öztürk wrote, that she “was sure they were going to kill me.” At another stop, she repeatedly asked an officer if she was in physical danger. “For 45 days, Rümeysa has been detained in Louisiana — over 1300 miles from her friends, her community, and her lawyers. During that time, she has suffered regular and escalating asthma attacks. And at the same time, the government has failed to produce any justification for her detention,” said Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts. “We are so relieved that Rümeysa will soon be back in Massachusetts, and won’t stop fighting until she is free for good.” Ms. Öztürk has suffered six weeks of crowded confinement in Louisiana with hardly any access to fresh air and in conditions that doctors say risk exacerbating her asthma attacks. Whereas her attacks used to last between 5 - 15 minutes, they now can last up to 45 minutes. Recent court filings also describe difficulty receiving appropriate care in detention, including delays to receive medical care and dismissive comments from medical staff. Since the government arrested Ms. Öztürk, her community at Tufts and around the country have rallied around her. Hundreds of friends, colleagues, and professors, including the president of Tufts University, have sent letters of support to the court detailing Ms. Öztürk’s dedication to her work and her community. “Rümeysa can now return to her beloved Tufts community, resume her studies, and begin teaching again. We could not be more delighted,” said Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney with ACLU. “Today’s ruling underscores a vital First Amendment principle: No one should be imprisoned by the government for expressing their beliefs.” “After today’s ruling, Rümeysa can return to her community at Tufts and sleep safely in her own bed. Tomorrow, she can wake up and begin the process of healing from this experience while she finishes her Ph.D. in child development.” said Monica Allard, staff attorney with the ACLU of Vermont. “Spending over six weeks in detention for writing an op-ed is a constitutional horror story. Her release is a victory for everyone committed to justice, free speech, and basic human rights.” “The government sent masked, plainclothes agents to kidnap Rümeysa off the street and lock her up for writing an op-ed. She has been a political prisoner for six weeks,” said Sonya Levitova, associate at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. “Now that she’s free and can resume her studies and rejoin her community at Tufts, we look forward to seeing the government in court to vindicate Rümeysa’s rights in full.” Ms. Öztürk is represented by Mahsa Khanbabai, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, ACLU of Vermont, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. For documents and other case information, see here.Court Case: Öztürk v. TrumpAffiliates: Vermont, Massachusetts - Press ReleaseMay 2025
Free Speech
Religious Liberty
Aclu Moves To Dismiss Lawsuit That Seeks To Punish Non-profit Advocacy Against Religious Activities In Oklahoma Schools. Explore Press Release.ACLU Moves to Dismiss Lawsuit That Seeks to Punish Non-Profit Advocacy against Religious Activities in Oklahoma Schools
OKLAHOMA CITY – Today, the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against it by the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE). FFRF sent letters to public schools in Oklahoma objecting to religious activities, prompting State Superintendent Ryan Walters and the Oklahoma Department of Education to file a “SLAPP” suit seeking to punish its constitutionally protected speech. The state’s Department of Education has failed to identify any actual violation of law. “We are proud of the work we are doing to protect the rights of conscience of public school children in Oklahoma,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president. “This frivolous lawsuit by Ryan Walters seeks to silence FFRF, and we are not going to allow that to happen.” FFRF is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Oklahoma. This “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation” (SLAPP) seeks to chill the free speech and petition rights of FFRF. SLAPP suits are used to weaponize the legal system to punish and silence constitutionally protected speech. “Advocacy organizations have the right to criticize government policy and push for change,” said Megan Lambert, legal director of the ACLU of Oklahoma. “This lawsuit is just another in a long line of political stunts by OSDE as it seeks to silence and punish dissent. We will vigorously defend FFRF’s First Amendment rights against the Department’s abuse of the legal process.” “Our client has not violated any law by speaking out against religious activities in Oklahoma public schools,” said Vera Eidelman, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “This lawsuit has one goal: to chill our client’s ability to petition the government. This is an abusive legal tactic intended to punish people and organizations for speaking out and fighting back against government policies.” The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma. The motion can be viewed online here.Court Case: Oklahoma State Department of Education v. Freedom From Religion FoundationAffiliate: Oklahoma - OklahomaMay 2025
Free Speech
Oklahoma State Department Of Education V. Freedom From Religion Foundation. Explore Case.Oklahoma State Department of Education v. Freedom From Religion Foundation
Status: Ongoing