The urban style known as “sagging” is now a criminal offense in many cities across the nation. In certain areas of Atlanta and in several small southern towns,”pull up your pants” laws are being enforced and violators face up to 60 days in jail. In Flint, Michigan,the chief police has made it his policy to file disorderly conducts against young men wearing saggy pants.Many critics  are outraged with the chief’s new law saying that it “violates ciitizens’ freedom of expression.” A group of activists known as the ACLU have taken it upon themselves to fight back against new “sagging” laws:

Flint Police Chief David Dicks has said he will not back down from his policy of filing disorderly conduct or indecent exposure charges against those whose saggy pants allow too much underwear or their bottoms to show on city streets.

In response, the American Civil Liberties Union’s Michigan chapter told the Free Press on Monday that it is now looking for targets of the policy to talk with the organization.

“We are confident that young men in Flint will contact us now that the chief has announced that he won’t budge,” Michael J. Steinberg, legal director of the state ACLU, said Monday. “If they do, we’ll sue. We may have the dubious distinction of being the first saggy pants lawsuit in the country.”

The ACLU had set Monday as the deadline for the police chief to halt the Flint police policy of stopping and searching individuals who wear their pants so low their underwear or bottoms show.



~ by blackcelebritykids on July 22, 2008.


  1. Ha-le-lu-ya! Say no to all negative aspects of ghetto culture and yes to positive change.

  2. I totally agree @Not Buying It. But I think up to a year in jail is kinda excessive.

  3. Does he have nothing better to do

  4. Yeah, I agree with you Steffie, the punishment is kinda steep. I didn’t even think that far though. I saw punishment, which will hopefully deter this behavior, and jumped for joy.

  5. I disagree with the government and laws wanting to tell people how to dress. There’s more important things in the world to worry about then how someone wears their pants. Up to a year in jail come on. That is going to far.

  6. The only one I agree with the “buttocks exposed” one. That should definitely be illegal because no one needs to see that. But yeah, don’t they have more serious issues to focus on?

  7. Or why not tackle all of the issues, small and big alike. That’s like saying, why detain a student who talks during a test when there are people shooting in schools? Seems kinda illogical to me.

  8. Okay steffie, where did you read one year? Are you up on drugs?
    60 days is only 2 months.
    Anyways, the punishment is still a bit much, but still, i hate seeing everyones but. disgusting.

  9. I agree with the buttocks exposed part…it’s nasty and very unappealing. Ew. That should definitely be illegal.

  10. Lisa, check out the white print in the black bubble above the heads…jeez

  11. It’s not about the gov. telling people how to dress. Not everybody wants to see what these “boys” and yes i said “boys” underwears looks like. It’s inapproapriate,disgusting and uncalled for. It is not attractive when a 30+ something year old guy is walking the streets with his draws showing. “SAGGING” originated in prison because the prisoners didn’t have belts to hold up their pants. They were not given any due to the fear that it would be used as a weapon or a hanging tool. And now it has made its way unto the streets amounst the black community as well as the white community as a “TREND”. The fine is very much appropriate because now a second thought will go into how u look when you walk out your house.


  12. That brings new meaning to the words “Fashion Police”.

  13. well then there better be the same law for women who always have their crack exposed too since womens pants are probably just as low cut except tighter

  14. I SOOOOO agree with this policy, but it’s sad when it has to come to white folks teaching us how to behave.

  15. I know right DW! Sad..sad..sad. I can’t wait until my people wake up.


  17. What about the parents? Shouldn’t they be responsible for their own children instead of the police?

  18. In theory, parents should be responsible. But, obviously many in our communities have dropped the ball and/or can’t control their kids.

  19. I don’t know why she is mentioning her being a Jehovah Witness because you are taught to wait until you get married to have sex. I am a Jehovah Witness, I have lived a clean live by studying with JEhovah Witnesses.

  20. I mean we all know that a mature adult cannot go out into the real world dressed in any of the above. However, it seems to me that this legislation was put forth to target a specific “kind” of human being. Dare I say it? Yes, I dare…THE YOUNG BLACK MALE. This is no surprise the government has created all kinds of “grandfather clauses” and “3/5 amendments” that are targeted at the core of Black culture, its men.

    Society is and may always be intimidated by the power of the Black male and this is why he rebels. From “dreaded” locks back in the day, to raiders caps in the late 80’s & early nineties, to sagging pants today…African Americans (but particularly young black men) have used their outward appearance as a form rebellion against a society who sees them only as dollar signs. “Let’s get them to pick our cotton, let’s throw them in jail and fine them so that we can keep making money at their disadvantage.” — That’s what the government might as well say. So I say F the government. F the police! Do ya thing Black man! Wear your clothes. The government is gonna try to find a way to hate, or should I say destroy, anyway…But still…we rise!

  21. Please, there is nothing powerful about a black man who choses to dress that way. Barack among others are the truely powerful men, and you wouldn’t catch them dead dressed like that. Its rediculous how everything has to be about “the man.” We need to check ourselves as people and stop trying to find culprits in other’s backyards.

  22. I never said the type of dress is powerful. If you read what I said rather than, just trying to argue…I said that the law is designed as a personal attack on black men and that this attack comes as result of intimidation of Black man’s power. I did not say the style of dress is power.

    What makes a man powerful, of course, is not his style of dress. That includes Obama. However, if society is going to use a culture’s style of dress as a means of attacking it, then I do find power in using that same venue (form of dress) as a form of rebellion. That is powerful. To say yes my hair is nappy and its beautiful. To embrace it and wear it in casacading locks down your back. To be exactly who you are in the face of hate and oppression. That is powerful.

    And if you read the first statement I made. I agree that no mature adult can get along in society dressed with under and/or behind fully exposed. However, that doesn’t make it criminal. And Obama if anyone, is a mature adult, who recognizes the same fact that I do. And another thing about Obama, is that first you have to follow the rules to change them. Who knows, maybe Obama might not see a problem with men wearing what they wear as long as they are thriving contributors to their family and their society. But he knows like I do that he’ll never be able to CHANGE the way society sees men who like him if wears the same clothing. Its kind of like…If you can beat ’em, join ’em…become the boss, and then beat the hell out ’em – for lack of a better analogy.

  23. If you read my post clearly, you would come to understand that I did not contend that your argument was that a man’s style of dress made him powerful. Instead, I was arguing that your point re this ordinance being another way of disempowering black men was unfounded… because black men who are powerful are not any less powerful b/c of this law. In fact most of these black powerful men probably agree that we need to change the way we as a people present ourselves to the world. And if mama and daddy won’t instill this at home, then, well….desparate times call for desparate measures.

  24. Maybe that wasn’t your point. If it wasn’t ok. It just seemed like that was what you were suggesting (that the law was another way of knockin’ a brotha down). I think that whole argumetn is getting old. We as a people need to start empowering ourselves instead of waiting for someone else to do it. Also, there is a right and wrong way of “rebellign against the system,” and it seems like some of our people are rebelling in a very self-destructive way. We need to wake up.

    Also, your comment about the natural hair. I see where you’re going with that. But that too can be disempowering and a way that we limit ourselves professionally. Sad, but true. So the same behavior that might be empowering in one situation might also be debilitating in another (the whole time and place argument). Striking a balance is the key. Surely we don’t want to assimilate to the point where we lack culture as a people; but letting go of some things arguably don’t detract from our rich culture. I’d contend that the pants sagging falls into that category.

  25. I don’t believe jail time is the right way to go for a crime of fashion. I also believe this law is geared to young black men. I’m sorry but I can’t stand up and cheer for a law that will put more black men in jail. Its like if you don’t do want I say… I will lock you up where I don’t have to deal with you. My personal opinion is I hate the sagging look. It grosses me out to see someones dirty nasty under wear. But I don’t think that warrants jail time.

  26. Yeah, I’ll agree it is harsh. But what’s our alternative? I feel like we need to be doing more in our communities to improve our situations and the way we dress and present ourselves is an ingredient to advancement. Btw, I hope everyone is going to watch “Black in America” tonight

  27. I guess we differ on what is powerful. I believe that the black man is powerful without regard to what he wears. How can we say that Obama is poweful, but KRS-1 isn’t because he’s not dressed the same. But when we start scrutinizing between KRS-1’s and Obama we complete miss the message and kill the messenger at the same time. How would we know about the beauty the Nas, for example, has to speak of being a young black child, if we’re worried about how far off his butt his pants are. That’s my point. The legislation is put in place to give men who dress like this trouble because it is assumed they have nothing positive to offer to society. Talking about catching people dead, you wouldn’t catch Bishop Don Magic Juan dead with his @ss hanging out, but we wouldn’t give him any trouble (except for a few laughs, points, and stares) about the way he dresses and he’s really the problem…Not Nas. Feel me?

  28. Dare I say it…but we did to ourselves. Im 38 years old….and I have a 18 year old son. I have been at this boy…since he was age 15 about so called saggin. A soon as I turned my back…he was saggin. The peer pressure was so bad….he couldnt help but do it. Let me say that I am so not for the goverment regulating our every move. You give them an inch..they take a mile. This is big brother at work. We as a people must put a stop to this problem. How? Thats a good question

  29. I have to say Not buying and shesh1nes both make compelling arguments. I agree we should stand against oppression. Also there is a right and a wrong way to do it. If you stand out the right way you make a bigger statement and reach a bigger audience. You stand up against it the wrong way and it is destructive to you and others. I say think it is another way of trying to keep black men out of the homes. I don’t know if you Willie Lynch The Making Of A Slave. It is very enlightening and it is one of the reasons I would have never voted for Hillary the other being she is a racist manipulative b++++.

  30. Women are not intended to be the head of the household. We are meant to stand by our man and let him run it as God intended and be his help mate and nurturer of his children. Motivating all when they need and making things easier at home so he can come home and feel like has a soft place to land after taking a beating day in and day out. This is just my opinion. Willie Lynch speaks of how breaking the strong willed down and taking the man out of the home so the natural order is upset by women being in the forefront. This happened hundreds of years ago when he sent out all these letters to slave owner so they would know how to keep them down. When he sent out these letters he said the if they did as he suggested they could keep us(black people) oppressed for hundreds of years and I have to say the man was a genius because even chains with pretty wrapping are still chains. Just because we see a few black people that do well we think things are getting better but most of the people in the position of power and influence don’t speak against us going out and spending our money on useless shit and getting a this crap in our mouth we don’t need, or try and tell us how to invest our money so we can all be prosperous. Instead the ones we see the most. Lil Wayne, 50 to name a few encourage the poor behavior.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: