A drag performance scheduled two days before Christmas drew sharp criticism at Thursday’s Pensacola City Council meeting, where more than a dozen residents urged leaders to block it. Council members acknowledged discomfort with the show’s timing but stressed that constitutional protections and existing contracts limit their authority.
The touring production, A Drag Queen Christmas, is booked for Dec. 23 at the city-owned Saenger Theatre and advertised as an 18-and-up show. The age restriction did little to ease opponents’ concerns, however. Pastor James Johnson of NorthStone Baptist Church called the performance “profanity-laden” and “blatantly sexual,” urging the council to disinvite it.
Former state Rep. Mike Hill described the booking as "debauchery" and warned that allowing it would invite “God’s judgment and retribution.” Similarly, Joe Wade, a District 4 resident, described the show as a “trans activist event” and “demonic,” adding that the controversy had “awakened a sleeping army of Pensacola’s Christian community,” and Ginger Keating warned council members: “You keep putting out this junk and it’s gonna come back on you and your family.”
Former Council Member Sherri Myers said she had once attended drag shows and enjoyed them, but now finds them “sexist” and “misogynistic.” Other residents argued that drag undermines family values or mocked Christianity.
No one spoke in support of the production on Thursday night. One speaker, Larry Downs Jr., said he wasn't a fan of drag, but he still defended the city's decision to allow it.
“You can’t have freedom without freedom,” he said, adding that as long as the performers paid full price, the city had no right to stop them.
Legal limits
Council President Jared Moore (District 4) said he understood why residents found the pairing of drag and Christmas offensive, but reminded them, “Free speech allows for disrespectful speech.”
City Attorney Adam Cobb warned that canceling the show would expose the city to lawsuits. He said the council lacked unilateral authority to revoke a booking and that doing so could trigger both contract claims and constitutional litigation.
“My emphatic and unequivocal recommendation is that you don’t just cancel the contract,” he told members.
Council Member Casey Jones (District 3) said he did not believe the council had the right to infringe on performers’ constitutional protections. Vice President Allison Patton (District 6) agreed, noting that her personal opinions about drag were irrelevant to her role. She suggested the city might consider future standards for events that include “lewd and lascivious” content, but stressed that the First Amendment was “the overriding factor.”
A broader fight
The dispute in Pensacola mirrors a statewide clash over drag shows. In 2023, Florida passed a law, Senate Bill 1438, restricting minors’ attendance at “adult live performances,” widely seen as targeting drag. Federal courts blocked the law, finding it likely unconstitutional. At the same time, state regulators sanctioned venues in Miami and Orlando for allowing minors at holiday drag shows.
One case involved A Drag Queen Christmas at The Plaza Live in Orlando in December 2022. Investigators reported simulated sexual activity, performers exposing their buttocks, sexualized Christmas songs, use of prosthetic genitalia, and a sequence they said simulated birth or an abortion. Regulators emphasized they saw no exposure of actual genitals. The venue ultimately paid a $5,000 fine and agreed to exclude minors from future shows.
Because the Saenger is publicly owned, Pensacola faces especially high legal risks. Government-run venues are subject to strict First Amendment rules, giving cities little room to cancel performances based on viewpoint or content.
What’s next
The council took no vote Thursday. The show remains on the Saenger’s calendar unless the promoter withdraws or both sides agree to changes. Members indicated they may consider broader, content-neutral rules for city venues at a future meeting.
Moore thanked residents for weighing in, saying he empathized with their concerns but must balance them with constitutional limits. “There is a legal element,” he said.
