Federal Appeals Court Rejects Challenge To Florida’s “Choose Life” License Plate

Liberty Counsel ^ | 3-13-03 | Mat Staver

[cgk]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 13, 2003

Federal Appeals Court Rejects Challenge To Florida's "Choose Life" License Plate

Atlanta, Georgia - On 3/12/03, the Federal Appeals Court for the Eleventh Circuit rejected a challenge to Florida's "Choose Life" license plate brought by several pro-abortion groups and individuals. The abortion advocates had brought the challenge claiming that the Choose Life license plate was unconstitutional because it only allowed for "one side" of the abortion debate to be presented. Liberty Counsel represented several license plate owners and crisis pregnancy centers that were eligible to receive the funds from the Choose Life license plates.

The lawsuit requested the court to strike down the state law which authorizes the Choose Life specialty plate. Alternatively, the abortion advocates claimed they were entitled to receive some of the private funds from the sale of the specialty plate. The Choose Life plate is one of more than thirty specialty plates authorized by state law. Under the law, any person or group may apply for the creation of a statewide specialty plate. The applicant must obtain a certain amount of signatures, present a marketing plan and pay an application fee. The private fees generated by the sale of the plate are then directed to the source authorized by the law pursuant to the application. In the case of the Choose Life plate, the private fees go toward the promotion of adoption. Thus far, the Choose Life plate is the most popular specialty plate in Florida. Sales in less than two years have already generated over $1,000,000.00 from the private fees alone.

On July 17th, 2002, Federal District Court Judge K. Michael Moore dismissed the lawsuit, stating that the abortion advocates lacked standing to challenge the law because they had never applied for their own (abortion) specialty plate and been denied. The Eleventh Circuit upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit using the same reasoning. In upholding the denial, the Court of Appeals stated, "The First Amendment does not require states to authorize the speech of those who have expressed no interest in speaking; it only protects the rights of those who wish to speak." The Appeals Court also stated, "The First Amendment protects the right to speak; it does not give Appellants the right to stop others with opposing viewpoints from speaking."

Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, noted, "This recent decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals is a great victory for every individual who bought a Choose Life license plate. The Appeals Court recognized the fatal flaw in the abortion advocates' reasoning. They attempted to use the First Amendment as a sword to silence pro-life speech." Staver added, "Nothing prevents abortion advocates from having their own plate. These groups and individuals simply could not stand the thought that a pro-life license plate existed; and instead of exercising their own right to free speech, they attempted to silence pro-life speech." Staver concluded, "Pro-abortion advocates were stopped cold in their effort to silence anyone opposing their view. This decision is a victory for free speech and reaffirms the principle that pro-life speech, even though it is controversial, is fully protected under the First Amendment."

[cgk]

I found this in Liberty Counsel's site, from 2 months ago. I could not find ANY articles on this decision in the mass media, only on pro-life/faith websites.

[cgk]

Liberty Counsel is now taking this to South Carolina, in support of their own "Choose Life" license plate.

Liberty Counsel Files Amicus Brief In Support Of South Carolina’s “Choose Life” License Plate

[Chewbacca]

Why don't these people make their own plates that say 'choose infancide', or 'choose death', or 'choose baby killing'.

[TommyDale]

"The First Amendment does not require states to authorize the speech of those who have expressed no interest in speaking; it only protects the rights of those who wish to speak." The Appeals Court also stated, "The First Amendment protects the right to speak; it does not give Appellants the right to stop others with opposing viewpoints from speaking."

This must make the DemocRATS choke. We can hope that the decision is upheld in the Supreme Court. This could have far-reaching effects against those who want to suppress the freedom to express ideas that are not "politically correct".

[cgk]

Because they know that their own message, comes to down to telling people the person driving the car believes exactly what you said. "Get the Government Out of My Ovaries" and "Reproductive Rights are a WOMAN'S Choice" just don't fit like "Choose Life" does. And "Choose Death" while straight-to-the-point will be sure to cost them some supporters who believe in abortion for rape and incestual cases. (Which I've heard make up about 1-3% of all abortions).

[cgk]

We can hope that the decision is upheld in the Supreme Court

I honestly don't see how it can't be upheld in the Supreme Court. Even Ginsberg would have a hard time explaining how free speech of those who do not agree with her political beliefs should be stifled.

I'm especially happy the appeals court didn't find for the pro-aborts on the monetary issue. Why SHOULD they get half the funds of something that expressly is against them?

[TommyDale]

I agree with you. I just don't trust this court completely.
Maybe next year, we will have a more solid conservative court.

[cgk]

Ping!

[cgk]

I agree with you. I just don't trust this court completely

(I hope you didn't think I was razzing you, because I wasn't... I saw your point.) ;)

And I don't trust them completely either, which is sad. I guess I'll know more when they rule on the Michigan affirmative action in education case.

[jmaroneps37]

The good guys win again!

[A-teamMom]

Thanks for the ping. I am sending my mom the money for one of her own. I wish I had the option in Michigan. We have two pro-abortion senators and a pro-abortion governor. If we could only do something about the east side of the state/liberal breeding grounds, then michigan could vote pro-life and conservative.

[The Iguana]

On July 17th, 2002, Federal District Court Judge K. Michael Moore dismissed the lawsuit, stating that the abortion advocates lacked standing to challenge the law because they had never applied for their own (abortion) specialty plate and been denied.

They need not apply for any "Genius" grants, that's for sure.

But that would have been a pickle if they had bothered to apply. What would such a plate say? "Choose Death"?

[A-teamMom]

How about, 'Kill the unborn. they can't stop you.'

[cgk]

I'd call your gift to your mom a "Thank You" and an early/late Mother's Day or Birthday present. ;)

I wish I had the option in Michigan. We have two pro-abortion senators and a pro-abortion governor.

Same here in Calif... I don't see it happening.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[Coleus]

`

[UCFRoadWarrior]

Agreed, Chewbacca. There is nothing stopping these groups from putting out their own license plates.....in Florida they need just 30K signatures/requests, and the State will issue a series

It sounds like the pro-abortion crowd is the one limiting freedom of speech

[cake_crumb]

There's no reason the Supreme Court won't uphold it. There truely IS no right to oppress the freedom of speech of others included in the First Amendment.

[TommyDale]

I didn't take it that way. :>)

[cgk]

;) Ya never know on these threads if you accidentally offended someone or not. I like to make sure people know when I am NOT arguing with them. It makes for a nicer time.