Virginia legislators get caught with pants down

Uncle Sam almost made Virginians head out to buy a belt or smaller pants. But fortunately for Virginians and the rest of the American public, the bill that would have made them do so did not make it into law.

Earlier this month, the Virginia House of Delegates passed a bill making “sagging,” or wearing pants below the waistline, illegal. Days later, the bill was defeated in the state senate. Although the debate in Virginia is over, the debate over legislating identity has just begun. Americans must recognize the deeper implications of such laws and take a stand against them.

The bill, passed in early February, states that “any person who, while in a public place, intentionally wears and displays his below-waist undergarments, intended to cover a person’s intimate parts, in a lewd or indecent manner, shall be subject to a civil penalty of no more than $50.” Language like this has no place in our law books for many reasons.

First, capturing a glimpse of someone’s boxers is not particularly offensive to me. Yes, seeing people’s private parts might be offensive, but I would not call the top of boxers “lewd.” Wearing pants low is characteristic of a certain style of dress, and as Americans, we have the right to express our own individual style. There is nothing inherently sexual or lewd about it. I find many people’s outfits to be distasteful, but that does not mean they are offensive, and they certainly should not be illegal.

Although variants of low-hung pants cross the spectrum of society, it is obvious that the intended targets of this bill belong tominority racial groups — specifically, they are black males.

This bill was as racially targeted as one against the perpetrators of popped collars would be. In a country where racial profiling continues to be a reality, we really do not need another law targeted at minorities.

Furthermore, it concerns me that lawmakers are wasting their time with issues like this. They should be focusing on legislative issues of more substance. Lawmakers claim their time is pressed, but they could have taken the time wasted on debating this bill to meet with more constituents.

Finally, the most important implication of bills like this is that they would only encourage the government to interfere with other aspects of dress, or even more broadly, identity. To many, clothes are an important means of expression — a way to relay to others who we are. When the government begins to dictate who we can and cannot be by telling us how to dress, it has clearly overstepped its boundaries. It makes me wonder which protection granted by the Bill of Rights will be next to go.

The bill’s author, Democratic Delegate Algie T. Howell Jr. (D-Norfolk), said, “It’s not an attack on baggy pants. … To vote for this bill would be a vote for character, to uplift your community and to do something good not only for the state of Virginia, but for this entire country.” Uplifting your community? Why not just reform education or health care? I think that would be a hell of a lot more uplifting than making me pay $50 if I wear my pants too low. It’s a good thing the Virginia State Senate agreed.

Noorain Khan is a Martel College junior.

Back to top