North Carolina Judge Finds Pro-LIfe Plate To Be Unconstitutional

untitled-174In an important ruling today, U.S. District Court Judge James C. Fox ruled that North Carolina is violating the Constitution by issuing pro-life license plates without issuing a pro-choice license plate. We have discussed this contradiction below and I believe Fox is absolutely correct on the issue.

Fox found that “The State’s offering of a Choose Life license plate in the absence of a pro-choice plate constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment.”

While the legislature approved the “Choose Life” plate in 2011, it repeatedly refused requests for pro-choice plates reading “Trust Women. Respect Choice,” or simply “Respect Choice.”

It is clear that these plates constitute a form of speech covered by the first amendment and the denial of the alternative plates shows the regulation of the content of such speech. While government speech is not subject to scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause, Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460, 467-68 (2009), government regulation of private speech is subject to the Free Speech Clause and must be content neutral. The decision this week follows precedent laid down by the Fourth Circuit in Planned Parenthood v. Rose, 361 F.3d 786 (4th Cir. 2003). In that case, the court found that “both the State and the individual vehicle owner are speaking” in such license plate messages.

What most disturbs me is that North Carolina schools are struggling and citizens are in desperate need of social services in this economic crisis. Yet, the legislature is still triggering these expensive litigation fights by trying to find ways of expressing religious views while silencing alternative views. It shows not only a lack of understanding of our Constitution as citizens but a lack of responsibility as legislators.

Here is the opinion of Judge Fox

Source: FOX8

56 thoughts on “North Carolina Judge Finds Pro-LIfe Plate To Be Unconstitutional

  1. Ariel: “As for the abortion issue, I’m pro-life while for allowing abortion.”

    Yeah. As for the rape issue, I’m for chastity while for allowing rape. Choice, you know. Oh? The rape victim does not consent to be raped? So what? The abortion victim does not consent to be murdered, either.

  2. Mike Spindell: “The purpose of a license plate is to allow the vehicle to be identified as being registered by a certain person.”

    The chief purpose of a [registration] plate is to show that the tax has been paid. Many times as many citations are written for not paying the tax than stolen cars are identified or possible criminal use of a car is identified.

  3. AI,
    You are logic and semantically challenged. I agree with Mike and raff. You will just have to forgive us if we aren’t buying what you are selling. How about this? Change that pro-life plate to “Forced Birth.”

    One thing I have found puzzling about the so-called ‘pro-life’ crowd. They support the woman being forced to give birth but then they lose interest. We are treated to the sight of children’s health care slashed in the interest of “balancing the budget.” Lower taxes are a lot more important than neonatal care, Head Start and nutrition programs. The US currently ranks 41st in child mortality. In the past 20 years the US slipped from 28th to 41st in child mortality. We are tied in the 41st spot with Qatar, Croatia, and the United Arab Emirates.

    Wonder why that is?

    • As usual, persons who cannot support their positions logically and knowledgeably resort to personal attacks and insults. Your statements have no substance.
      “They support the woman being forced to give birth but then they lose interest.”
      Birth is a natural process. Any “forcing” of birth is by nature, hormones, biological operations, not by “Pro-Lifers.”
      “Lose interest?” Just another baseless, ignorant (appearing, though I doubt you really are) blanket accusation. Certainly SOME “Pro-Lifers” lose interest, but apparently you look the other way when passing a Pregnancy Support Center, adoption agency, unwed mothers’ home, and the like, few of which are operated or supported by disciples of Margaret Sanger, and which do not commonly have parades tooting their horns, but quietly go about their work. Real “Pro-Lifers” raise their children instead of having them shredded or their dead bodies and parts sold to “science” labs.
      Government “health care” is founded on violence as it is funded by taxation. “You WILL “contribute” or YOU WILL BE SHOT!!” Taxes should rightfully be spent only on actual governing, not on social programs.

  4. OS,
    Al doesn’t want to admit that the so-called pro-life crowd is pro-zygote and then once the baby is born, he or she has to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, unless they are born into an entitled family, of course. They want small government except when it comes to women’s bodies.

    • Rafflaw, One of the chief duties of government is to protect those who are unable to protect themselves from being murdered.
      Parents are customarily supposed to raise up the children they produce.
      What is “entitled?” Entitled to the produce of the labor of others without any trade? Gov’t. “welfare?”

  5. Mike Spindell, the same as gave you a right to impose your religious/philosophical views on me, and on unborn human beings. They are denied any say.
    All laws impose someone’s religious/philosophical opinions on everyone they impact. All anyone needs to impose his ideas on others via law is a sufficient number of gunmen who will obey him. In a republic that “one” is supposed to be a body of legislators and judges to render their legal opinions.

    • Al,

      The difference re imposition of rights is that your religious views define a human being incorrectly. Life begins at the first breath. However, phony pro-life people such as you want it your way and thus have no respect for the choice of the mother. The reality is that your phony piety masks a resentment of woman’s sexuslity and a culture of Patriarchy. The proof of this is the opposition to birth control espoused by many of your breathren. As is the fact that none of you care for the fate of the child or mother after birth. You are merely religious hypocrites who hate women. Probably because you’re insecure in uour own sexualty.

  6. AI:
    You are using a false equivalence fallacy. The false equivalence is equating a grown, self-aware human being with a collection of cells with less self awareness than lichen growing on a rock. To claim anything else is self-delusional propaganda. Until the fetus is developed enough to live and thrive on its own outside the womb, it is, quite literally, a parasite growing inside the woman’s body. She is the host for what is, quite literally, a tumor that with any luck, can become a human one day. When talking with some of your ilk, I learned that even an anencephalic fetus should be forced to come to term and have a “chance at life,” which is patently BS.

    Save your rigid authoritarian version of the American Taliban views for those you can influence. As I wrote last night, you are going to have a hard time trying to impose your 12th century views on the folks who inhabit blogs like this.

  7. Тhat іs really attention-grabbing, You’гe an overly professional blogger.
    Ι’vejoined youг rss feed and look forward tо
    seeking extra of уour magnificent post. Аlso, I’ve shared уouг website
    іn my social networks

Comments are closed.