Placelowerplace Report This Comment Date: May 04, 2007 06:43PM
State looks to pull anti-Bush license plate
By Kevin Woster, Journal staff
RAPID CITY -- Heather Moriah loves the personalized license plates on her silver
Prius encouraging the impeachment of President George W. Bush.
But somebody doesn’t agree. And that somebody complained to the state. Now,
the South Dakota Division of Motor Vehicles is trying to recall the plates --
which read MPEACHW. And if Moriah doesn’t turn them in voluntarily, the state
might send law-enforcement officers to pick them up.
Even so, she’s not immediately inclined to cooperate.
“I don’t think I’m going to play,” Moriah said Thursday afternoon.
“The plate isn’t in poor taste. It‘s not sexual in nature or pornographic.
To me, a political message should not be considered offensive.”
But Division of Motor Vehicles director Deb Hillmer said Thursday that the law
clearly gives the state authority to recall the plates and have them forcibly
removed if necessary. And although only one person complained about Moriah’s
political statement, that’s all it takes to recall a set of vanity plates,
Hillmer said.
“I’m following the letter of the law,” she said. “It’s offensive to
someone and not in good taste and decency. And the plates are the property of
the state of South Dakota.”
State law declares motor vehicle licenses plates to be the property of the state
as long as the plates are valid. The law also allows personalized plates with as
many as seven letters for an extra $25 fee. But it gives DMV officials the right
to refuse to issue “any letter combination which carries connotations
offensive to good taste and decency.”
Hillmer said MPEACHW meets that criterion. The plates never would have been
issued if DMV officials had caught their meaning at the time Moriah applied,
Hillmer said.
“This was one that we apparently missed when it came through originally, and
we received a complaint from an individual that found it offensive,” she said,
declining to identify the individual or provide the contents of the complaint.
“I don’t think we ever would have issued it if we’d have picked up on what
it was inferring.”
Moriah said she bought the 2005 Prius late last summer and fitted it with
personalized plates similar to those her partner, Curt Finnegan, had on his blue
2004 Prius. His plates actually read: IMPCH-W.
Moriah said has received plenty of positive reactions in public to her plates
and that negative responses have been rare. So she was surprised to receive the
April 18 letter from the DMV announcing the recall and giving her 10 days to
turn in the plates at the Pennington County Treasurer’s Office or the DMV
office in Pierre.
The letter said DMV would issue a refund on the months remaining on Moriah’s
license.
She is hesitant to give up the plates, however, because she believes her
free-speech rights are being unnecessarily limited.
“It’s kind of sad to me,” she said. “For one person to be able to say
they’re offended because it’s different from their political beliefs seems
really arbitrary. And I don’t think the law is very clear about what
‘offensive’ means.”
Hillmer said the law gives the state great latitude in making that
determination. Moriah is free to exercise her free-speech rights in ways that
don’t involve state property or implied state sanction of a given message,
Hillemr said.
“They have every right to use that free speech, but they need to do it with a
bumper sticker,” she said. “That plate is property of South Dakota. And that
(message) is not something the state should advocate.”
It wouldn’t matter if the political message or the president were different,
it would be inappropriate on a state plate, Hillmer said.
Moriah has contacted the American Civil Liberties Union, which intends to
protest the recall in a letter to the state. Moriah said it’s unlikely the
ACLU will pursue legal action, in part because she is planning a move to
Pennsylvanian in the next couple of months.
Finnegan already has moved there and replaced his South Dakota plates for
Pennsylvania plates, Moriah said. Moriah hopes to leave in June or July, with
her plates still intact. Hillmer said it might not work out that way.
“We may have law enforcement go pick them up if we receive more complaints
about it,” she said. “If she returns them, we’ll make her new plates. If
we have to go pick them up, we probably won’t.”
Hillmer has been with DMV for more than 20 years. She remembers five or six
instances when so-called vanity plates were recalled. One of them said
“SNIPER” and another “OLDFART.”
Moriah is the only person to complain about a recall, Hillmer said.
Rapid City lawyer Patrick Duffy said there’s plenty of reason to complain.
Duffy, who has worked on key civil rights cases involving American Indian voting
issues, said action by the state means that any personalized plate must be
recalled because of a single complaint, no matter what the message.
“What this means is that every atheist can now wipe out anything that seems to
refer to God,” Duffy said. “Will vanity plates for members of the armed
forces suddenly be declared offensive if they offend a single pacifist? It’s
absolutely preposterous.”
Even obscenity must be judged by the mores and standards of a community, not
just one offended individual, Duffy said.
“Here, all we need is one lone citizen who is apparently invested with the
complete authority to determine what is good taste and decency for all the rest
of us,” he said. “It seems a little tyrannical to me.”
Contact Kevin Woster at 394-8413 or
kevin.
;woster@rapidc
5;tyjournal.com
Mrkim Report This Comment Date: May 04, 2007 07:11PM
An interesting conundrum indeed. Though she has the right to free speech,
since the state technically owns the plate they can recall it and likely for any
or no reason at all, completely legally, so long as they honor the commitment
she made to them when she purchased the plates by issuing her credit for the
unused portion of her registration.
Personally I think recalling the plate because of a single complaintant (who
never has to be announced, leaving the possibility open that there never
actually WAS a complaintant at all!) is waaaay too PC for my tastes. Since this
is not a sexually or a moralistically based statement she's making, I don't see
how anyone could violate her 1st amendment rights by denying her right to make
such a statement.
Again however, the rub comes in that the plate is "technically" owned
by the state and not her, so in allowing this statement to be made by her with
their property essentially would show support by the state of her comment, which
it doesn't care to do from the sound of things.
.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: May 04, 2007 08:28PM
Hate to break it to everyone but you need to keep track of what laws they're
working on at all times......
Some of you may think that this has nothing to do with license plates, but,
you're wrong, there are laws out there that people continue to push and sooner
or later they will succeed, anything they call a law that is there to help
people you better watch out for, all those laws that supposedly help people
really restrict people, "anti-hate" is really a cover for total
control, read this article, surprised, you'd better keep an eye out.
FEDERAL
HATE LAW WILL PERSECUTE YOU
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: May 06, 2007 01:16AM
If one complaint from the public is sufficient, then the obvious response is to
generate a lot of complaints, one per personalized plate, until the state stops
being so ridiculous. Let them have to recall 200 plates a day, and pay all the
extra costs associated thereby, and they will either eliminate personalized
plates or come to a more reasonable way of determining offensiveness.
IK but this is wrong. wow. just pathetic
