1-24-2005Supreme Court says States have to offer Abortion Rights Tags in Addition to Anti-Abortion Tags
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court declined Monday to consider whether states may offer license plates with anti-abortion messages, leaving lower courts divided over whether the programs in a dozen states unconstitutionally restrict dissenting views.
Couple of points on this. First of all, I can't see why someone would go through all the trouble of actually bringing a lawsuit on this issue. While I disagree for the most part with the anti-abortion crowd, this has got to be one of the lamest premises for a USSC case I've ever seen. While I think affinity license plates are dumb in general and plates that say "choose life" or similar to be over the top stupid, it certainly doesn't make me say "hey, if only they had a pro-choice license plate...." Isn't that what bumper stickers are for? And since one of the main purposes of these affinity plates is to generate a bit of extra cash for the state, I'd think that if there were a market for "pro-life" plates they'd already be producing them.
Secondly, I'm kinda curious on what grounds this became a Constitutional question that the USSC needed to decide. I don't remember the First Amendment having an "Fairness Doctrine" clause mandating that both points of view on a subject have to be aired when it comes to political speech (such as it is when the "speech" involved is a license plate). They offer "animal lover" plates here in VA with a picture of a cat and dog on them, does that mean I should be able to sue to force production of an "animal hater" plate with a picture of some roadkill on it?