LegalReader.com  ·  Legal News, Analysis, & Commentary

News & Politics

Legistlative and Judicial Use of Sex Toys


— July 29, 2004

I know that I’m a bit late to the party in blogging about yesterday’s 11th Circuit opinion upholding Alabama’s ban on the sale of sex toys, Williams v. Attorney General of Alabama. But I felt that one part of the decision still warranted mention.

The law in question prohibits the commercial distribution of “any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs for any thing of pecuniary value.” (The district court helpfully pointed out that this would include “vibrators, dildos, anal beads, and artificial vaginas.”)

But the Alabama legislature, in its infinite wisdom, included an exemption for sales of sexual devices “for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial, or law enforcement purpose.” Ala. Code sec. 13A-12-200.4. What the . . . . ???

Would that exempt sales to this judge from Oklahoma, or perhaps even this one from France?


I know that I’m a bit late to the party in blogging about yesterday’s 11th Circuit opinion upholding Alabama’s ban on the sale of sex toys, Williams v. Attorney General of Alabama. But I felt that one part of the decision still warranted mention.

The law in question prohibits the commercial distribution of “any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs for any thing of pecuniary value.” (The district court helpfully pointed out that this would include “vibrators, dildos, anal beads, and artificial vaginas.”)

But the Alabama legislature, in its infinite wisdom, included an exemption for sales of sexual devices “for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial, or law enforcement purpose.” Ala. Code sec. 13A-12-200.4. What the . . . . ???

Would that exempt sales to this judge from Oklahoma, or perhaps even this one from France?

Join the conversation!