Technology

South Dakota Looks Like It Might Be The Next State Asked To Explain Its Stupid Vanity Plate Laws To A Federal Court

From the wow-no-HLDMYBR-allowed-in-a-state-with-this-many-DUIs dept

By  
on
Vanity plate

via Getty

Governments are weird. Maybe “weird” isn’t the right word. The more accurate word may be “opportunistic.” When it comes to speech they don’t like, they move into this mode. If they think they can silence it, they will try to. And they’ll do this while still pretending the speech they’re trying to control is nothing more than their own.

Dig if you will, my brothers: vanity plates. Government speech or personal speech? Those who view this rationally likely believe that the message on a vanity license plate is the expression of the plate’s purchaser. That it’s delivered by a state-issued plate doesn’t matter. We don’t actually believe the government is trying to send a message with their IMGOD or COPSLIE or LOVETOFU vanity plate. (ALL ACTUAL CASES.)

Instead, we would logically infer the truncated statement on the vanity plate expresses the views of the person paying for this privilege.

But the government also believes it has some obligation to “protect” other drivers from being offended by the personal expressions of others, which is a supremely ridiculous belief to entertain, even professionally. So, the entities issuing plates tend to err on the side of absurdity (governments tend to phrase this as “caution”), rejecting any plate any government plate content moderator might view as “offensive.”

Naturally, these discordant (read: unconstitutional) views have led to multiple lawsuits from offended purchasers whose preferred plates have been rejected for reasons most governments aren’t able to explain consistently, much less coherently.

A cop can’t get his “01NK” plate. A state says “COPSLIE” is a problem, but is more than happy to approve plates that are more cop-positive. An inability to see past “FU” means someone can’t reference tofu in their vanity plate.

Sponsored

Now, it’s my home state on the chopping block. As some of you are aware, I live in the darkest heart of the midwest: South Dakota, home to anachronisms like “felony ingestion” charges and, um, Governor Kristi Noem.

Believe it or not (and I was somewhat surprised myself), this state has a fully operational wing of the ACLU. And it is now going to bat to South Dakota drivers that have managed to irritate the state with their impertinent vanity plate requests. Here’s the rundown, brought to us by another valuable public service, South Dakota Searchlight:

It’s OK to be a “HELLCAT,” but not a “HELLBOY.” Don’t tell anybody to “HLDMYBR,” but it’s fine to go on a “BEERRUN.” And don’t say “IH8U,” but “YUH8ME” is acceptable.

Those are some of the inconsistencies in state government’s evaluation of specialized vehicle license plate requests, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota. The ACLU sent a letter to state officials Tuesday citing what the organization described as actual examples of approvals and denials.

“Unfortunately, the state is censoring the free speech protected by the First Amendment and is inserting its own voice in the place of the citizens’ voices of South Dakota,” said Andrew Malone, ACLU of South Dakota staff attorney, in a news release.

The letter demands that the state Motor Vehicle Division, within 14 days, approve applications that have been denied on the grounds of carrying “connotations offensive to good taste and decency” since Aug. 1, 2022 (the ACLU told South Dakota Searchlight later that the date has no particular significance, but represents about a year’s worth of denials). The letter also demands that the state refrain from using the quoted rationale to deny any future applications.

Prompting this letter [PDF] is the rejection of resident Lyndon Hart’s request for a plate reading “REZWEED.” Medical marijuana was recently legalized (despite the governor’s best efforts), with the easiest access to medical weed flowing through reservations.

Apparently, the state Department of Revenue Motor Vehicle Division didn’t care for someone calling attention to the most abundant source of (LEGAL!) marijuana. So, it rejected Hart’s request.

Sponsored

Now the ACLU is in the mix. And it’s safe to assume that if the (let’s just call it the “DMV”) backs down, it’s going to be facing a lawsuit in the near future. The state’s Motor Vehicle Division has been too careless for too long with its arbitrary rejections of requested plates. And “arbitrary” is synonymous with “First Amendment violation” when it comes to trampling on speech the government should be considered to be protected, rather than demonstrative of secondhand state endorsements.

Here’s how the ACLU explains the current situation in SoDak:

In the past five years, more than 30 percent of the personalized plates denied by the Motor Vehicle Division were rejected because they allegedly carried “connotations offensive to good taste and decency” – a standard that is overly broad, vague, and subjective.

Although only a few characters long, vanity plates are often used to convey a meaningful expression of the driver’s personal message, identity, values, or sense of humor. Unfortunately, the state is censoring the free speech protected by the First Amendment and is inserting its own voice in the place of the citizens’ voices of South Dakota.

At this point, the state has two choices: it can change the rules to comply with the First Amendment. Or it can be named as a defendant in a federal lawsuit. Precedent is on the REZWEED’s and the ACLU’s side.

The First Amendment prevents arbitrary decision making when it comes to expression. The standards used by the Motor Vehicle Division are so arbitrary that it denied such plates as “HLDMYBR” and “BEERMOM” while approving “BEERRUN” and “BEERMAN.” It’s clear that the Motor Vehicle Division does not have in place adequate, lawful, and constitutional standards to assess personalized license plates.

If a state wants to have speech standards, it can. But — as the word “standard” indicates — the standards must be consistent and consistently applied. They cannot be whatever the hell is on display here.

I, for one, welcome our new ACLU-sued-into-submission vanity plate overlords. H8SC0PS is mine for the taking.

South Dakota Looks Like It Might Be The Next State Asked To Explain Its Stupid Vanity Plate Laws To A Federal Court

More Law-Related Stories From Techdirt:

After Years Of Stupid Games, The Senate Finally Gives The Biden FCC A Voting Majority. Now What?
Move Over, Software Developers – In The Name Of Cybersecurity, The Government Wants To Drive
Filing Bogus Copyright & Patent Claims On Your Not-Actually-Sentient AI Is Not A Good Way To Market Your Not-Actually-Sentient AI

CRM Banner

Topics