The case before the U.S. Supreme Court on whether Texas can ban a license plate with the Confederate flag after the Fifth Circuit appeals court held that the specialty plates are private speech so can’t be restricted by the state. The appeals court found that the state was practicing viewpoint discrimination in banning the plate. (International Municipal Lawyers Association, December 15, 2014, by Lisa Soronen)
The conservative columnist George F. Will, The Washington Post, December 17, 2014, argues that Texas’ argument that the flag was offensive does not meet the First Amendment standard for censoring speech. He quotes the Supreme Court in a case over a Buffalo Soldiers license plate that Native Americans found objectionable: “The Constitution does not permit the government to decide which types of otherwise protected speech are sufficiently offensive to require protection for the unwilling listener or viewer. Rather . . . the burden normally falls upon the viewer to avoid further bombardment of [his] sensibilities simply by averting [his] eyes.”
The only Supreme Court precedent on license plates was Wooley v. Maynard, the Court rulding that Jehovah’s Witnesses had the free speech right to cover up the New Hampshire motto, “Live Free or Die.” There is speculation that the Court could rule that although the state could not engage in viewpoint discrimination, they could decide that some groups such as African Americans could suffer harm from state’s apparent endorsement of statements that endorse racism. (The Verdict, December 17, 2014, by Michael C. Dorf)