None of which have beaches like the one in the photo.

I feel like they might have been wise to wait for a less fucked up SCOTUS before taking this before it.

It's not a bad idea, as it's something that needs doing but it's unlikely to be passed as a federal law, and they're kind of right that it is unconstitutional.

But this is bad timing.

Edit: It might not be clear that I was referring to the three women who are avoiding to the article taking freedom of toplessness to the supreme court, where I think they're unlikely to get support with the court's current constellation. Losing the case now might make it harder to get a similar case before a more favourable constellation of the SCOTUS in the future, so it's not very strategic in that sense.

Then it was rightfully pointed out that the article was old, and they had already lost the case before the SCOTUS (in it's current constellation). So indeed bad timing.

Maybe I wasn't clear. Or maybe there's an unpopular opinion in there. Dunno. Cheers.

I have an "umm what about" regarding "of all ages."

Say a 15 year old girl decides to walk topless down main street. Is everyone on that street who has a security camera running going to be convicted of making child porn?

I don't trust the legislature to have been competent enough to edit the rest of the code to reflect that change nor do I trust the thin blue line punisher sticker crowd to pass up something they can portray as a crime.