Teen Nudist Camp Lawsuit That Changed Virginia Law

Virginia’s teen nudist camp law, enacted in 2004 as an amendment to Virginia Code § 35.1-18, bars the state from licensing any “nudist camp for juveniles” unless each minor attending is accompanied by a registered parent, grandparent, or legal guardian who is present at the camp.¹ The statute is still on the books and has not been amended since it passed.

What the Law Actually Requires

The rule operates through state licensing. Virginia regulates hotels, camps, and campgrounds through the Department of Health, and the 2004 amendment tells the department it cannot issue a license to a juvenile nudist camp unless every minor camper has a parent, grandparent, or legal guardian registered and physically present at the facility.¹ An aunt, older sibling, family friend, or group chaperone does not satisfy the requirement.

The law is written as a condition on licensing a specific kind of camp, not a general ban on minors visiting nudist resorts with their families. A family visiting a nudist resort together is not what the statute addresses; a standalone youth camp program for minors is.

The 2003 Camp That Prompted the Law

In June 2003, the American Association for Nude Recreation–Eastern Region (AANR-East) held a weeklong juvenile nudist summer camp at White Tail Park, a nudist resort on about 50 acres in Southampton County near Ivor. The program was split into a Youth Camp for ages 11 to 15 and a Leadership Academy for ages 15 to 18, and 32 campers attended.² It was the first juvenile nudist camp in Virginia and only the third in the country.³

The following session, Delegate John S. “Jack” Reid, a Republican from Henrico County, introduced House Bill 158.⁴ It moved through the General Assembly with almost no opposition: 98 to 1 in the House on initial passage, 40 to 0 in the Senate, and 98 to 2 and 40 to 0 on the version adopted after Governor Mark Warner’s amendment.⁵ The law took effect July 1, 2004.⁶

Supporters called it a child-protection measure. Tim Murtaugh, spokesman for then-Attorney General Jerry Kilgore, called the requirement “common sense” and said “pedophiles tend to congregate where children are accessible.”⁷ Reid described the bill as “a step for protecting children,” and the Family Foundation of Virginia endorsed it.⁸ ACLU of Virginia executive director Kent Willis argued the bill “substantially interfered with the right of families to make lifestyle choices” and said the state’s reasoning could just as easily justify barring children from swimming or riding a bus without a parent.⁹

The Lawsuit and How the Courts Ruled

On June 29, 2004, the ACLU sued in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of White Tail Park, AANR-East, and three families with children registered for the camp session planned for late July.⁹ The complaint raised three claims: a Fourteenth Amendment right to privacy, the right of parents to direct their children’s upbringing, and the First Amendment right to free association.¹⁰

Before any ruling on the merits, the camp fell through. On July 19, 2004, White Tail Park owner Robert Roche returned AANR-East’s permit and canceled the 2004 session, saying 24 registered campers could not attend because no eligible guardian was available.¹¹ The camp was moved to an undisclosed neighboring state for that summer.³

On August 10, 2004, U.S. District Judge Richard L. Williams dismissed the case, holding there was “no controversy before the court” once the permit was surrendered.¹² Going beyond mootness, Williams also called the parental-presence rule a “minimal restriction” and wrote that parents “are in no way compromised by having a parent in a camper reading ‘Gone With the Wind’ while their children frolic outside.”¹³

The Fourth Circuit partially reversed on July 5, 2005. The panel agreed that the individual family plaintiffs’ claims were moot and that White Tail Park itself lacked standing on the record presented. AANR-East was different: the organization had already applied to run the camp again at White Tail Park in the summer of 2005, which showed a continuing intent to hold the program. Writing for the panel, Judge William B. Traxler Jr. held that a regulation reducing the size of a speaker’s audience “can constitute an invasion of a legally protected interest,” and that AANR-East had shown a concrete injury in the form of fewer campers and a reduced ability to spread its message of social nudism.¹¹ The First Amendment claim went back to the district court.

After that, the trail goes cold. The ACLU of Virginia’s case page lists White Tail v. Stoube as “Closed,” but no published opinion, settlement notice, or news report in the available record explains how the case ended on remand.¹⁰ No court ever ruled on whether the statute is constitutional.

Where Things Stand Now

Virginia Code § 35.1-18 remains in effect and has not been amended since 2004.¹ A licensed juvenile nudist camp in Virginia still cannot operate unless each minor attendee has a parent, grandparent, or legal guardian registered and present on site.

White Tail Park, now branded White Tail Resort, continues to operate year-round in Ivor and markets itself as “Virginia’s only Family Friendly Nudist Resort.”¹⁴ There is no public indication that it runs a youth-specific camp program today, and one outside description characterizes the facility as designed for “people who chose to enjoy being naked with other adults.”¹⁵

1
Virginia Code Commission. Code of Virginia, Title 35.1, Chapter 3
2
Findlaw. White Tail Park, Incorporated v. Stroube
3
NBC News. Judge Dismisses Nudist Camp Lawsuit
4
The Virginian-Pilot. ACLU Tries to Block Nudity Law
5
Virginia Legislative Information System. HB 158 Summary
6
ACLU of Virginia. Appeals Court Reinstates Lawsuit Challenging Ban on Teen Nudist Camps in Virginia
7
Virginia Lawyers Weekly. Judge Dismisses Challenge to Teen Nudist Camp Law
8
The Virginian-Pilot. Virginia’s Nudist Law Stands
9
ACLU of Virginia. ACLU Challenges Virginia Ban on Teen Nudist Camps
10
ACLU of Virginia. White Tail v. Stoube Case Page
11
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. White Tail Park, Inc. v. Stroube Opinion
12
The Washington Times. Judge Dismisses Virginia Nudist Camp Lawsuit
13
American Constitution Society. White Tail Park v. Stroube Analysis
14
White Tail Resort. White Tail Resort Homepage
15
Virginia Places. Nudist Resorts in Virginia