Since tattooing is a form of speech and expression under the First Amendment, the city of Hermo Beach must find the least restrictive means of pursing its valid interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens. The court found a total ban on tattoo studios was not a reasonable "time, place and manner" restriction on this form of speech. Lest you think the 8th Circuit is getting a bit too hip for its own good in defending the "pure art" of tattooing, let the judges put your mind at ease. While defending the expressive content of tattoos under the Constitution, the court also sighed, "We do not profess to understand the work of tattoo artists to the same degree as we know the finely wrought sketches of Leo da Vinci or Albrecht Drer, but we can take judicial notice of the skill, artistry, and care that modern tattooists have demonstrated." In other words, more Gluck, less Gaga. The result? Don't look for a Kat Von D exhibit in the Los Angeles Museum of Modern Art anytime soon. But, baring a successful appeal by the city, you might look for a nice bit of ink from Johnny Anderson in Hermo Beach, possibly in the commercial zone around Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard.

What insight do you have on this?Please remember to use the RAC Format and provide support for your answers from the text or other authoritative source.Please provide a citation for the source.

Google the incident so it's easier.