The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Indiana Court Rules No Constitutional Rights Violated by Revoking Inappropriate License Plates

Posted on December 8, 2015 by Larry Bodine

indiana license plateThe Indiana Supreme Court ruled a former police officer’s free speech rights were not violated when his personalized license plate was revoked by the state’s bureau of motor vehicles (BMV).

The plaintiff Rodney Vawter, was a police officer for several years prior to filing suit against the BMV. He had applied and received a personalized license plate “0INK.”

He thought the personalized plate would be a humorous comment as a member of the Fraternal Order of Police. However, the BMV revoked the license plate stating it was offensive or misleading content.

The BMV by state statue is allowed to reject any personalized license plate (PLP) application that:

  1. Carries a connotation offensive to good taste and decency
  2. Would be misleading
  3. The bureau otherwise considers improper for issuance.

The statute also allows a previously issued license plate to be revoked if the bureau: (1) receives a substantial number of complaints regarding the previously issued PLP; and (2) determines the PLP contained references or expressions that Indiana law prohibits.

The state has a review process with categories of reasons why the PLP will be denied or revoked including “invalid format or inappropriate content.”

The Walker Test

The Walker test applied in this case has a three-factor standard for identifying government speech:

  • Whether the government has historically used the medium to speak to the public;
  • If the message is closely identified in the public mind with the state;
  • The degree of control the state maintains over the messages.

See also: Ex-Boyfriend’s Craigslist Revenge Post Protected by the First Amendment

The court concluded that because license plates have been used for many years as a means of expression, identification of others and other government purposes they are government speech. The court referenced multiple logos states use to highlight unique identifiers about the state. In Walker, the court stated that simply because private parties participate in the design and extension of this communication does not decrease the states interest.

The state maintains direct control over the combinations on its license plates, the court said. Denying any applications that are contrary to the state statutes was the BMV controlling the messages conveyed.

Generally, a public forum is a place held out for use by the public for speech-related purposes. The court ruled license plates are excluded from the traditional sites used for communication, public assembly, and discussion.

License plates are neither public forum nor limited public forums. It was the court’s opinion that the policies and practices of the BMV showed the government’s objective to use as identification but also the plates are not expressive activities.

Expressive activities are used to encourage diverse views and understanding. However, motorists have other mediums that serve this purpose. Motorists are allowed to use bumper stickers, decals, and other objects to express various views.

Although the plaintiff argued the plate regulation was overbroad, the court ruled the issue was moot and did not address the argument.

Posted in Blog

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Salmon Purchasers Reach an $85 Million Price Fixing Settlement

Salmon Purchasers Reach an $85 Million Price Fixing Settlement

May 27th, 2022

According to Reuters, who had seen the proposed settlement after it was filed on 25 May, the settlement will r[Read More...]
Ford Agrees to Pay $19 Million to Settle False Fuel Economy and Payload Claims

Ford Agrees to Pay $19 Million to Settle False Fuel Economy and Payload Claims

May 27th, 2022

Ford Motor Company as agreed to a $19.2 million multistate settlement among 40 attorneys general that concluded an investigat[Read More...]
Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

May 25th, 2022

The proposed settlement reached nearly a year after the catastrophic Surfside building collapse along the South Flo[Read More...]
UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

May 25th, 2022

The University of California system announced Tuesday it will pay nearly $375 million to more than 300 women who said they we[Read More...]
Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

May 24th, 2022

We are all too acquainted with insurance coverage in our everyday lives. According to Investopedia, everyone should have[Read More...]

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.