Short version, Bennie Hart requests vanity plate in Kentucky, ‘IM GOD’. The Godless heathens of Ohio granted him that plate 12 years before, but he now wants one as a KY resident. Kentucky refused, first saying that is was "obscene or vulgar language ", then saying that it poor taste and could lead to confronation.
Resident has sued and the ACLU has joined in.
I have to side with State on this. I do not feel this is a 1st Amendment issue.
(I am still googling to find the answer to the question “who actually owns the plate”). If the State of Kentucky owns it, it is a no-brainer. No one has the right to express themselves with Government property. if Mr Hart owns it, it is a little stickier, IMO.
But each State sets up rules on what they will and will not allow on the plates they issue. That Bennie Hart wants this sentiment on his car is no reason for the State to issue it on a license plate.And his message is NOT being censored. Mr Hart is free to have ‘IM GOD’ on a bumper sticker. He is free to paint it large letters on the hood and door panels of his car.
As to the claim that the State is claiming Mr Hart’s religious views are obscene or vulgar, therefore demeaning him…this seems a little backward. It seems more to the point that KY doesn’t want to* participate* in Mr Hart’s demeaning of other resident’s religious views.
Just to be clear, if the State decides that they are OK with issuing such a plate, as Ohio obviously was, I am OK with that. But this seems like the State’s decision and not an individual’s right. But am I posting this for discussion, because I could be wrong.
Other states have run into these issues. Because it is a 1st amendment issue states should stop issuing vanity plates because it could create real problems to allow anything on them. But I still want to get a plate with 3M TA3.
Just glancing at some of the Pledge Of Allegiance cases, it seems to me that he could use that same reasoning that the states used to allow the PofA to be allowed in public schools (as decided by the courts), such as:
“a New Hampshire lower federal court which found that the pledge’s reference to God does not violate non-pledging students’ rights if student participation in the pledge is voluntary”
–(Looking at the plate would be voluntary)
“In a 2–1 decision, the appellate court ruled that the words were of a “ceremonial and patriotic nature” and did not constitute an establishment of religion”
–(He could argue that “IM GOD” is just ceramonial and has nothing to do with religion)
I’m sure there’s other cases and probably plenty of other things that have nothing to do with the PofA, but this, at least for me, is the low hanging fruit. However, I feel like there’s a separation of church and state thing in there somewhere, or rather a lack thereof.
Could it be argued that issuing the plate would be an endorsement of HIS religion. “He’s God, the State of Kentucky has put their stamp on it!” I wonder if Ky has any explicit religious plates. “1TRUGOD” or some such? Or conversely, “NO GOD”?
I just checked plate availability at the website ( License Plates | Personalized Plates | drive.ky.gov ) and none of those are available, though it doesn’t say if its because they are taken or disallowed.
I do find it interesting that KY plates say “In God We Trust”
Finally, I had a lot of fun trying to find ways to sneak through dirty plates. “AHOLE” isn’t allowed, but “AH0LE” (zero for the O) was OK
16a For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever issueth human an “IM GOD” license plate should not perish, but have everlasting life.