The old conundrum of \"free speech for me, but not for thee\" is back before the nation's highest court. <\/p>\n
Legislative lust for cash led to a program in Texas that allowed motorists, for a $30 fee, to put their own group messages on their license plates. <\/p>\n
But the free exercise of speech ran into a heckler's veto, the result of which is a case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether the state can veto the presence of a Confederate flag logo on a motorist's plates. <\/p>\n
In oral arguments this week, Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller said the state can veto the flag because \"the First Amendment does not mean that a motorist can compel any government to place its imprimatur of the Confederate flag on its license plate.\" <\/p>\n
R. James George Jr., who represents the Sons of Confederate Veterans, countered that it's not the state speaking, but the individual who carries his own personal message on his license plate. Besides, the state allows more than 400 specialty plates and all those messages can't reflect state speech. <\/p>\n
Does that means Nazis or dopers could put \"Swastikas\" or \"Make Pot Legal\" on Texas license places, asked Justice Anthony Kennedy. <\/p>\n
Sure does, George replied. Freedom means freedom for everybody, he contended, and the state policy allowing individual groups to design their own messages applies equally to all groups. <\/p>\n
News accounts indicate that Texas specialty license plates tout everything from favorite schools to political slogans. The state has rarely rejected a proposed design, and it might not have rejected the Confederate logo if opponents hadn't protested at a motor vehicles department board meeting. When they said they found the logo personally offense, board members unanimously voted to prohibit it. <\/p>\n
The Sons of Confederate Veterans sued, alleging the state is engaged in blatant viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment's free speech guarantee. Under the viewpoint discrimination doctrine, government is not allowed to pick and choose the speech it will allow. <\/p>\n
The Confederate flag means different things to different people. It's no surprise that a lawyer for the NAACP calls it a \"powerful symbol of the oppression of black people.\" After all, the Confederate flag was the symbol of the Southern slave states during the Civil War. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Go here to read the rest: The old conundrum of \"free speech for me, but not for thee\" is back before the nation's highest court. Legislative lust for cash led to a program in Texas that allowed motorists, for a $30 fee, to put their own group messages on their license plates. But the free exercise of speech ran into a heckler's veto, the result of which is a case pending before the U.S. Continue reading
\nCash leads to controversy<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"