Is there a constitutional right to put annoying signs on the back of your car?

George Washington's horse Did the Framers of the Constitution recognize a historically grounded fundamental right to have annoying signs on the back of your car?  Applying originalist and strict constructionist principles of constitutional interpretation, we ask: Did George Washington advertise his views on taxation on the rear end of his horse? Did Mary and Joseph flee to Egypt on a donkey whose hindquarters proclaimed “Baby on Board”? No? Well, that should settle it.

But shouldn’t we also consider penumbras, emanations and evolving standards of indecency? As Samuel Johnson famously remarked to Boswell, “Sir, I give not a farthing for what some total stranger chooseth to inscribe on the back of his conveyance. I know of no man, Sir, whose considered views upon a subject have been altered by the sight of contrary views emblazoned in such vulgar fashion.  A displeasing message scribbled thus serves only to proclaim to the World that the occupants of said conveyance are but fools and scallywags.”

Nevertheless, messages on custom license plates became a matter of Supreme concern last term.  What’s the difference, you may ask, between this bumper sticker, which is permitted:

don't blame me confederate flag

and this license plate, which is prohibited:

   except that one costs fifty cents and the other costs thousands of dollars?

The difference is of overwhelming constitutional significance, said the Supreme Court in Walker v.  Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans (2015).  Custom license plates, they explain, are government speech, which the government can restrict in any way it wants.  “A person who displays a message on a Texas license plate likely intends to convey to the public that the State has endorsed that message. . . . That may well be because Texas’s license plate designs convey government agreement with the message displayed” (italics added).

Really? These plates (all real) convey messages endorsed by the Texas Legislature?  Eat junk food? Root for out-of-state sports teams? Prefer golfing to legislating?

auto.MightyFineBurgers auto.DrPepper     auto.OleMiss     auto.IndianaUniversity     

Here in New York, where it’s generally recognized that the Confederacy lost the war, the controversy wasn’t over Dixie flags but over a proposed anti-abortion custom plate. Children First Foundation v. Fiala (2d Cir. 2015). 

NYChooseLifePlate sm  The Second Circuit couldn’t bring itself to say with a straight face that license plates represent the Government’s viewpoint. Instead, the court upheld the ban on the controversial message by saying that license plates are merely revenue-raising, vehicle-identifying devices, not expressive activity to which the First Amendment applies. These (real plates) look pretty expressive to us:

Hibernian plate Old-Blue-Knights-MtrcleOld-Copshot-PsngrMLK license plate

On that note – Squawk is taking the summer off to write a detective story. We’ll say only that the hero is a defense attorney and the corpse is a prosecutor. We shall return.

Sherlock Squawk

About Appellate Squawk

A satirical blog for criminal defense lawyers and their friends who won't give up without a squawk.
This entry was posted in First Amendment, Law, Law & Parody, Satirical cartoons and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Is there a constitutional right to put annoying signs on the back of your car?

  1. Alex Bunin says:

    Ooh, ooh. Can the hero be a dashing chief public defender in Houston?

  2. dark of the stars says:

    I’ll miss you!!! Your return will sweeten the back-to-school blues.

  3. Lois says:

    Have fun.   Looking forward to reading your book.  Lois  

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s