• Home
  • News
  • Coins2Day 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
Small Business

Bikini Baristas Sue City for Bare-Skin Ban: ‘It’s About Women’s Rights’

Andrew Nusca
By
Andrew Nusca
Andrew Nusca
Editorial Director, Brainstorm and author of Coins2Day Tech
Down Arrow Button Icon
Andrew Nusca
By
Andrew Nusca
Andrew Nusca
Editorial Director, Brainstorm and author of Coins2Day Tech
Down Arrow Button Icon
September 11, 2017, 3:58 PM ET

A group of “bikini baristas” filed a lawsuit on Monday against a city in Washington State alleging that two recently passed ordinances banning bikinis and bare skin among restaurant employees violates their constitutional rights.

The baristas, so named because they wear beachwear or underwear while serving beverages to consumers, are a controversial fixture of the metropolitan Seattle area. Establishments such as “Peek-A-Brew Espresso,” “Knotty Bodies Espresso,” and “Natte Latte” have popped up in the area, vying for the attention of customers looking for, well, a bit more of a jolt from their daily cuppa.

The group filed their lawsuit against the city of Everett, which recently passed ordinances banning bare shoulders, bare midriffs, and bare buttocks among restaurant employees. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, argues that such bans violate employees’ constitutional rights to free expression and privacy.

“This is not about the bikini,” attorney Schuyler Lifschultz told the Seattle Times. “ It’s about women’s rights and the U.S. Constitution. The City of Everett violated these women’s rights across the board.”

The ordinances passed unanimously by the City Council in August in response to criticisms that the businesses were no more than dressed-up strip clubs. They require employees of “quick service” food and beverage businesses to cover “minimum body areas” while on duty, including the breasts, torso, and top three inches of legs below the buttocks. The ordinances went into effect Sept. 5.

The plaintiffs—seven baristas and one chain owner—argue that their right to privacy would be violated if officials inspected them to ensure compliance with the rules. They also argue that the ordinances discriminate against women.

About the Author
Andrew Nusca
By Andrew NuscaEditorial Director, Brainstorm and author of Coins2Day Tech
Instagram iconLinkedIn iconTwitter icon

Andrew Nusca is the editorial director of Brainstorm, Coins2Day's innovation-obsessed community and event series. He also authors Coins2Day Tech, Coins2Day’s flagship tech newsletter.

See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Coins2Day 500
  • Global 500
  • Coins2Day 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Coins2Day Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Coins2Day Brand Studio
  • Coins2Day Analytics
  • Coins2Day Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Coins2Day
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Coins2Day Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Coins2Day Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.