CW: Ableism / Disability exploitation, LGBTQ+ discrimination, Sexual content (brief/legal context), Death (brieth), Religion
There’s the usual laws, like no kissing your wife on Sunday, and then there’s the law about keeping ice cream in your back pocket. Remy delivers on weird laws that are still on the books, some of which we can be arrested for very easily. Or may actively be breaking. And that you might be breaking. Right now.
We’ll start here with this data-driven reference site that compiles and maintains verified legislative information across all 50 states. Their stupid laws database is updated annually—which means someone out there is actively tracking America’s dumbest legislation so you don’t have to.
This is a legal information resource run by attorneys that cross-references actual state statutes to verify which weird laws are still enforceable. A solid starting point for separating genuine legislation from the fake stuff you find floating around on the listicles on the internet.
This is a Kentucky-based news outlet that traced the ice cream cone law back to its 19th-century horse theft origins.
This is a well-cited overview of the practice, its history in Florida and New York bars, and the legislative response. A good first stop before diving into the primary sources below.
This article was written by one of the advocates who personally lobbied the Florida Legislature for the 1989 ban. A firsthand account of how the law came to exist and why it mattered.
An investigative piece from a nonprofit Pennsylvania newsroom that traced the state’s 1861 anti-fortune-telling statute through its legislative history, including its original targeting of Philadelphia and its anti-Romani subtext.
This is the official press release from the American Civil Liberties Union on the 2010 Maryland court decision striking down Montgomery County’s fortune-telling ban on First Amendment grounds. There’s a donation popup, but just exit out of it.
Published by the Smithsonian Institution, this piece draws on historical records to document how the American dairy industry lobbied for discriminatory margarine legislation in the late 19th century. This is great context for understanding how economic interests shape food law.
This is National Geographic’s deep dive into the decades-long legislative battle between butter and margarine industries. It covers the pink-dye mandate, state-level bans, and how the dairy lobby shaped federal food policy for nearly a century.
The Foundation for Economic Education’s analysis of the federal Margarine Act and the broader economic protectionism behind anti-margarine legislation. This is useful for understanding the policy mechanics underneath what sounds like a very silly food fight.
Maintained by Middle Tennessee State University, this entry covers the full legal and constitutional history of Sabbath laws in America, from the Jamestown Colony through modern Supreme Court rulings. This is an authoritative academic reference on why so many Sunday restrictions are still standing.
An accessible explainer on the blue law history behind Sunday car dealership closures, including which states still enforce the ban and the economic reasoning that keeps the laws in place.
This Wikipedia is a broad overview of the religious practice, its origins in early 20th-century Appalachian Pentecostalism, and the state laws it prompted. It’s just a good, useful primer for the topic.
An in-depth legal analysis of the First Amendment arguments surrounding religious snake handling laws, including court rulings and the tension between religious freedom and public safety.
This is a legal blog post from the Tennessee Bar Association examining the history and current status of snake-handling prohibitions in Appalachian states. It’s written for a legal audience but accessible enough for anyone who wants these kinds of details.
News coverage of the 2014 death of Pastor Jamie Coots in Kentucky, which brought national attention to the ongoing practice of religious snake handling and the limits of the laws designed to prevent it.
A 2013 investigative piece from a leading LGBTQ+ publication documenting which states retained sodomy laws after the Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas ruling and how those laws were being selectively applied in ways that still caused real harm.
A 2025 update tracking the current status of unenforced but technically active sodomy statutes, and why their continued existence on the books matters in a post-Roe legal landscape.
Leave a Reply