Does an ordinance expressly punishing only women, but not men, for identical conduct—being topless in public, classify on the basis of gender?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Three women active in the Free the Nipple Movement were convicted of violating a Laconia, N.H. Ordinance prohibiting public exposure of “the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple.” Laconia, N.H., Code of Ordinances ch. 180, art. I, §§180-2(3), 180-4. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed their convictions in a published opinion rejecting state and federal Equal Protection Clause defenses. Contrary to federal appellate decisions, New Hampshire’s high court held an ordinance punishing only females for exposure of their areolas does not classify on the basis of gender. Alternatively, New Hampshire’s high court held the Ordinance would survive intermediate scrutiny anyway—a holding directly at odds with a recent Tenth Circuit decision, which in turn conflicts with decisions of the Seventh and Eighth Circuits. The questions presented are: 1. Does an ordinance expressly punishing only women, but not men, for identical conduct—being topless in public—classify on the basis of gender? 2. Does an ordinance criminalizing exposure of “the female breast,” under which only women are prosecuted for public exposure of their areolas, violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause?