"It wants Texas to issue a specialty plate showing the Confederate battle flag, which a state panel rejected. The group argues that if Texas allows plates that express some opinions, it also must allow the battle flag, even if the symbol offends many people. Anything less, the group says, amounts to discrimination against its viewpoint, in violation of the First Amendment.... Texas rightly sought to avoid the perception that the state was speaking in a way that is contrary to constitutional values like equal protection under the law. It wanted to avoid even the risk of seeming complicit in official nostalgia for the institution of slavery."
A NYT op-ed by polisci prof Corey Brettschneider and lawprof Nelson Tebbe. There's a second case about North Carolina rejecting a pro-abortion-rights specialty place. The 2 professors struggle to say why North Carolina should lose but Texas should win. They recommend "a balancing approach," with Texas deemed to have a strong interest in any connection to slavery and North Carolina having only a "comparatively weak interest" in distancing itself from abortion rights. (North Carolina already has a "Choose Life" specialty plate.)
ADDED: Brettschneider has a good book, which is in my Kindle: "When the State Speaks, What Should It Say?: How Democracies Can Protect Expression and Promote Equality."
AND: I haven't thought deeply about these cases yet, but I will reveal that my sudden vocalized outburst as Meade proofread this post out loud was: "You know, if you can't take the heat, don't have specialty license plates."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४६ टिप्पण्या:
How about one distinctive license plate for each state, with no variations allowed?
It seems to me that this should be an all or nothing proposition. The government should either be content neutral, and allow all such plates; or it should allow none. Allowing some, and banning others places the government in a position of having to judge speech. Thus the plates do become an endorsement or rejection of speech.
I have just as big an objection to a PETA or Greenpeace plate as the authors do to the Confederate flag.
This is yet one more case of people using big government to do something (raise money for interest groups and charities) that government shouldn't be doing. If someone wants to personalize their car, let them buy a bumper sticker.
So, you're talking about a license plate. So, it's not a time or place restriction (which I think is allowed). It's clearly a question of what can be placed on your own license plate on your own car. So aren't we talking about a limit on content, and isn't content the thing the state cannot control? Isn't this exactly what we don't want the state to decide, what is allowed to be said, and what is not? Seems simple, either allow no specialty plates or any.
You'll have to pull the Packers plate from my neighbors cold dead heads.
But he's like 75, has COPD but still smokes. So you probably won't have to wait long.
Can Wisconsin allow Packers plates but ban Vikings and Bears plates?
"How about one distinctive license plate for each state, with no variations allowed?"
That would have been the safe choice, but the states are very far along in this game, presumably for the money. No one is arguing that the states shouldn't be allowed to engage in this risky policy choice. The question is how risky will it become. If you allow one thing, like the innocuous pro-football team plate or something uplifting about the environment, do you have to allow everything, even hateful messages? Is there any limit to what groups can demand, like KKK plates or swastika plates? If there really is no limit, then the states will be driven out of this money-raising scheme.
Well, good!
Can any group or individual petition for a license plate? A particularly odious plate?
Back in the late 80's I was driving north from my new residence in South Florida. I stopped for gas in Georgia and handed the clerk my credit card.
She asked me "What's your tag number?"
"Excuse me?"
"What's your tag number?"
"I don't understand."
"Your tag number ... your license plate"
"Ohhhhhhhh"
I had never heard a license plate referred to as a "tag". I soon learned that this was the common parlance in Florida and remains so today, and I assume in Georgia, too.
Just imagine all the money the state could raise with special "Choose To Abort Descendants of Confederate Veterans" plates.
Ans it s not just license plates.
If the "Redskins" logo is offensive and illegal, then so is any Viking with horned helmet, or whatever, not to mention Wisconsin "Cheese head" displays.
There are two Brewer plates. One with the cool MB glove. And another with the current Miller M.
Althouse nailed it with her tying it to the money that the state brings in.
My thought on vanity plates is always, Would this logo, symbol or word get my car bashed-in if I parked it somewhere unprotected?
There's also the fact that it's a rebel flag raised against the United States. Why should the federal government put up with this when it was the federal government Texas rebelled against?
Truly bizarre.
Texas has an insane number of custom plates. I go with the plain issue, but really like the “Enjoy Music” plate with Blind Lemon Jefferson. There’s talk of a Stevie Ray Vaughan plate. Now that would be cool.
"Danno said...
Althouse nailed it with her tying it to the money that the state brings in."
Everyone already knew that.
If it is about the 1st Amendment, should the minor amount of money the states make from this racket matter?
"Why should the federal government put up with this when it was the federal government Texas rebelled against?"
I believe that we're talking about State-issued plates here (I'm offended by U.S. Government plates wherever I see them, BTW - let the Feds pay for State plates like the rest of us).
Put me down for "All or nothing."
Alabama, natch, was issuing license plates that read NOHOMO-I think they banned them, which is shocking.
Any variation of your license plate is tacky.
tits.
I think this is an easy one. Texas doesn't prohibit the Confederate flag (I'm assuming), they just won't stamp out a metal version of it and mail it to you. You can voice your opinion yourself, but why must Texas be compelled to speak for you?
No speciality license plates, at all. They are a defacto government endorsement of a cause or opinion.
If you have an opinion, buy a bumper sticker.
Original Mike said...
I think this is an easy one. Texas doesn't prohibit the Confederate flag (I'm assuming), they just won't stamp out a metal version of it and mail it to you. You can voice your opinion yourself, but why must Texas be compelled to speak for you?
If other people are allowed to express their opinions on their plates, then the State should not ban your plate just because it does not like your opinion. That is regulating content. That is what the First Amd is about.
They could decide to allow no speech on license plates.
"That is regulating content. That is what the First Amd is about."
The first amendment does not require the government to furnish you your podium.
Specialty License Plates: a gate through which the State allows some speech to pass. Bad idea.
"Just imagine all the money the state could raise with special "Choose To Abort Descendants of Confederate Veterans" plates."
Sorry Meade.
Same market. No additional revenue.
Original Mike said...
"That is regulating content. That is what the First Amd is about."
The first amendment does not require the government to furnish you your podium.
Yes, but having furnished the podium, it cannot regulate the content.
As I said, they could withdraw the podium from everyone.
It is either a state license plate, or a public bulletin board.
Make up your minds!
How did car registration become political expression? Get a bumper sticker.
"As I said, they could withdraw the podium from everyone."
I'd be fine with that, but I am not persuaded that if they have them they have to allow any message.
A bit off topic, but my niece has started dating a young man (one of the most together young men I've met) who is the descendant of both slaves and a Confederate soldier. He doesn't make excuses for either lineage. He has dreads to his waist and is also a forthright Southern gentleman. I wonder what he would want on his license plate?
Governments are going to put limits on the message; that's a given (for example, no state is going to allow "Death to America"). So we are in a place where we either ban them all (my preferred choice) or, if we are honest, agree that the State can arbitrarily pick and choose. The third option, which I find repulsive, is to indulge the dishonest, lawyerly, bullshit "balancing approach of Brettschneider and Tebbe.
Texas residents do not have the choice of placing a personalized plate of ones own preference on the front of the vehicle. Both front and rear must display an official plate. In other states I have seen religious plates, political plates, Confederate flags,state flags, Canadian flags, college plates, and so forth, in the front plate holder. Not allowed in Texas.
Some of these comments remind me of the school district who, having been told that they have to allow a LGBT club to meet after school, decided to not allow any clubs at all on school property.
"Dixie" is a loser's song.
Texas has an insane number of custom plates.
...with Arkansas' Razorbacks and Sooner Schooners on them, too. Weird.
It's people voluntarily paying higher taxes -- like all those liberals who give more where they complain taxes are too low -- so what's the problem?
There's 1 registered University of Michigan plate in Texas. Go Blue!
The fact that Texas was a member of the confederacy makes things much more complicated. It's an official state-issued tag; that means that the state is speaking, too. A neutral observer could easily conclude that a Texas issued license plate with a Confederate flag on it meant that the state government was officially endorsing this part of the history. In fact, I think that most observers would conclude this.
The question of whether Texas was right to join the Confederacy, own slaves, participate in segregation, etc, is an issue that the state government of Texas has a legitimate institutional viewpoint on.
"It's an official state-issued tag; that means that the state is speaking, too."
Yep.
Let's make this more interesting. Let's keep the Confederate Naval Ensign design I presume they're using, and add the words "Democrat Heritage."
Then make popcorn.
I do not understand why the cops put up with it.
Here in New Mexico, even the "standard" state license plate comes in 2 different color combinations, in addition to which you have the "balloon" plate, and I think a centennial plate from 2012. Then there is the National Guard, DAV, and I think also another military veteran's plate. The colleges around the state each have a plate, and the large ones, UNM and NM State, have additional ones for football and basketball fans.
And there is one that I think has something to do with kindergartens or day-care centers.
Of these, the "standard" appearing plates are the only ones where the plate numbers are easily read.
Texas also has Choose Life"
plates.
They're causing heads to explode.
'"You know, if you can't take the heat, don't have specialty license plates." "
bingo! that said these plates are big money makers for the states. When I moved to Virginia in 1997 I was amazed by the number of speciality plates they had, and the number only grew over time. Virginia had a similar lawsuit over a Sons of Confederate Veterans plate. The SCV sued and won. Similar suits have taken place in other states and in each case the states have lost. I can't wait for someone to sue over the states who censor personalized plates. Virginia and I think other states have not allowed certain personalized plates because they may be considered offensive. Sorry folks but that is censorship. don't want to deal with items that may be offensive then don't offer personalized or specialty plates.
"How about one distinctive license plate for each state, with no variations allowed?"
that used to be the rule. in the 70s personalized plates were introduced in Texas, folks loved them and the state raked in the bucks until they raised the cost basically doubling it from $25/yr to $50/yr at which points people didn't renew the personalized plates as being to expensive. State thought they would double their revenue instead it stayed about the same.
not sure when the speciality plates came into being but they are a gold mine for the state as well as the groups that want them
Tennessee probably has more speciality plates than any state. They fall into a number of categories and some raise money for non-profit organizations, such as alumni associations, friends of national and state parks, etc.; some supplement funding for state agencies, such as the Arts Commission or for various environmental, conservation, and recreation agencies; and some are just to recognize various categories in the military such as active duty, retirees, Medal of Honor and Purple Heart, POW. For a non-profit to get one established, they first have to find a member of the legislature to take it up and get it through committee, passed by the legislature, and signed by the governor. After that, the sponsoring group has to go to work to get it adopted. This normally requires taking orders and payments from 500-1000 individuals by a certain date. If the goal is not met, it dies. Once adopted, the group has to maintain the minimum number of registrations or the state will stop issuing new plates. It would be very difficult for some group like the KKK, neo-nazis, or any other such group to get a plate in production. The process requires broad public support and groups that don't have that will not get one.
I would say that our plates are very popular, even with the significant added cost, and I think the public would be disappointed if they were discontinued. My wife and I have had speciality plates for the past 12 years or so, me with a Georgia Tech plate and she currently has the Appalachian Trail, which supports the Appalachian Trail Conference. I tried to change mine earlier this year to the "Save Our Battlefields" plate, which supports the Civil War Preservation Trust, but the local office was sold out.
I don't think the linked article explained that the SCV is not really trying to get the flag on the plate, it's their logo, which I assume is trademarked. It embeds the square version of the Confederate battle flag in the center. (And no, for the millionth time, that is not the "Stars and Bars"). I don't know what other design you could expect the organization to have. We have that plate here in TN as well as the "Choose Life" and I could be wrong but I don't think there was much controversy about either when they were adopted, they had to meet the minimum pre-sales or they would not exist.
I found the linked article to be unconvincing and many of the commenters to be bigoted and ignorant. The SCV is not a bunch of raging racists trying to resurrect the Confederacy and restore slavery. I am not a member (I do qualify) but I am a member of several other Civil War historical organizations and I have met some people who are members and they are just people who enjoy history and genealogy as I do. Many are re-enactors. I know the local chapter where I live stages an annual encampment and re-enactment of a small battle that took place in our community in 1864 and it is well-done and everyone enjoys it.
The state does not force anyone to buy these plates. They are voluntary. If you don't like them, just get a standard plate. You'll even save money.
BTW, the University of Alabama alumni and the University of Florida alumni have their own Tennessee plates. We Tennesseans are friendly and welcoming bunch.
The rebellion and Confederacy were both illegal under US law, at least so far as current US law is concerned.
Are governments really required to give a platform to people who want to praise criminals? Could I go to Texas and demand a "put wings on pigs today" license plate?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा