[Apologetics] FW: 6th Circuit Finds “Choose Life” License Plate Constitutional

[Art Kelly]

-----Original Message-----
From: MadisonCenter at aol.com [mailto:MadisonCenter at aol.com]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 3:56 PM
To: MadisonCenter at aol.com
Subject: Sixth Circuit Finds Tennessee “Choose Life” License Plate Constitutional


Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom
1 South 6th Street
Terre Haute, IN 47807-3510

PRESS RELEASE 
Friday, March 17, 2006
Contact: James Bopp, Jr.
Phone 812/232-2434; Fax 812/235-3685; jboppjr at aol.com

Sixth Circuit Finds Tennessee “Choose Life” License Plate Constitutional

Today, in ACLU, et al. v. Bresden, et al., No. 04-6393 (6th Cir. March 17, 2006), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that Tennessee's "Choose Life" specialty license plate was government speech and, as such, was constitutional under the First Amendment. As authorized by Tennessee statute, 50% of the money used to purchase the plate is to be provided to New Life Resources, Inc., the Appellants in the case, to assist women who carry their children to term. 

The challenge to the Tennessee “Choose Life” license plate program was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, Planned Parenthood of America and its state affiliate, and two Tennessee citizens, who claimed to wish to purchase “Pro Choice” license plates.  The suit claimed that the Choose Life plate statute and the Tennessee specialty license program create a “limited public forum” within which the State practice “viewpoint discrimination” without violating the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  Because Tennessee refused to enact a Pro Choice license plate law, but enacted a Choose Life plate law, the plaintiffs alleged that it engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.

Represented by attorneys with Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom, New Life Resources argued that a public forum for individual speech was not created by the license plate program, but rather was a byproduct of government speech. The Sixth Circuit agreed with New Life Resources and reversed the district court, finding that the program provides funds for abortion alternatives and other legitimate purposes and that the “Choose Life” message was governmental speech.  “So long as Tennessee sets the overall message and approves its details,” the Court wrote, “the message must be attributed to Tennessee for First Amendment purposes.”

James Bopp, Jr., lead counsel for New Life Resources, states that “this victory allows the government to advertise a Pro Life message without having to also endorse a Pro Choice position in its social and educational program.” “The ‘Choose Life’ message,” Bopp continues, “is similar to messages like ‘Don’t Smoke’ or ‘Don’t Do Drugs.’”  Governmental speech can take a selective position on issues that the government cannot take toward private speech.  
     
Statutes have been enacted specifically permitting production of Choose Life license plates in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, and Tennessee. Court challenges to these statutes have been made by advocates of Pro Choice license plate availability have been launched against the Louisiana, Florida, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Tennessee statutes. All these challenges claim that the State cannot constitutionally approve Choose Life plates without also approving “Pro Choice” plates.
This ruling means that all of these Choose Life plates are constitutional.
____________________
To unsubscribe from this e-mail list, please send an e-mail message with “UNSUBSCRIBE” as the subject to: cbostrom at bopplaw.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20060319/e06bad1a/attachment.html>