Blog Posting # 2

Is That Plate Speaking for the Driver or the State?

Article Tools Sponsored By
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: April 27, 2009

WASHINGTON
Skip to next paragraph
Related
Times Topics: U.S. Supreme Court

The last time the Supreme Court considered what the First Amendment has to say about license plates was in 1977, when it ruled that New Hampshire could not force George Maynard to drive around with plates bearing the state’s motto, “Live Free or Die.”

Mr. Maynard said he was not satisfied with those options. He would, he said, choose life, “even if it meant living in bondage.”

The justices probably thought their decision settled things as far as free speech and license plates were concerned, and for more than 30 years they have turned their attention to other matters. But now the flipside of Mr. Maynard’s case, involving license plates that say “Choose Life,” is heading toward the court.

No one is forced to use the plates, which are available in 19 states and seem intended to appeal to those who oppose abortion rights. They are so-called specialty plates, which are available for an extra fee to people who want to express themselves through their license plates.

To learn more about this story -- please select the link below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/us/28bar.html?_r=1

Personal Comments:

After reading this article I was a little disturbed with some of the things mentioned. I strongly feel that people or drivers are entitled to purchase specialty-license plates of their choice, whether the plates state “Choose Life”, “Play Tennis”, or “Pro-Family”, as the article states “no one is forced to use the plates.” Personally specialty-license plates do not offend me in anyway. I think it’s a matter of choice if one decides to purchase a specialized license plate. After all, we as Americans live in world where freedom of speech is acceptable. Yet, after reading this article I’m starting to wonder how true this is. In the article it mentions that the state of Illinois says “it should be allowed to decide what goes on its license plated because they convey government rather than private speech. If that is right, the First Amendment drops out of the equation, as the government is free to say what it likes.” I was somewhat bothered by this comment because I feel no state should have the right to restrict/deny a certain license plate to its population. All citizens within the U.S. should be given the option/choice to select a license plate that reflects their personal beliefs or opinion.


Aside from my personal remarks regarding specialty license plates, I was surprised to learn that many of the proceeds from specialized plates are donated to various organizations. For example, the “Choose Life” plate generated about 800,000 in 2007. The Florida state law requires that the money raised from those plates, after administrative expenses are deducted, be given to adoption agencies. The Florida law forbids sharing the money with group offering “counseling for or referrals to abortion clinics.” After reading this section within the article, I agree that proceeds raised from this particular license plate should be used to support adoption agencies. I think this is a wonderful way to give back to such a useful organization. I think yearly contributions to adoption agencies will help to support the many children within this organization.
Overall, I think this was very interesting article which takes a close look at world’s beliefs and/or opinions which can be openly and vividly expressed on a license plate.


Questions:
What are your thoughts about this article? Do you feel the government has the right to restrict certain specialty-license plates? Do you feel the proceeds earned from specialty-license plates should be given to certain organizations such as adoption agencies? If not where would you like the proceeds earned to be disbursed to?