State hands out free "In God We Trust" Bumper stickers

[pgwenthold]

Well, not technically, but, in effect, that is what is going on.

The state of Indiana has a new, optional license plate with a big, "In God We Trust" plastered on it.

OK, not a problem, right? I mean, the state of Indiana has lots of specialized license plates. In addition to vanity plates, there are also Purple Heart plates, Children Education plates, Environment plates, along with the standard college based plates (Indiana, Purdue, Ball St, Indiana St, etc)

So what's the big deal? Well, the problem is that, whereas all the other specialty plates come with a $15 "administrative fee," the new In God We Trust plates come at no extra fees, and are the same price as the old generic plate (that I have).

Now, what happens is that when people go to the BMV, they are given the option to renew their old plates with just a sticker, or, for the same price, they can get the shiney, new plate with In God We Trust.

Thus, the state is effectively giving them an "In God We Trust" bumper sticker for free.

And it is catching on. In the more rural areas, where people are renewing license plates in person, more than 3/4 are getting the new plates, I estimate. In the university towns, where more people are renewing on-line, they are sticking with the old plates, because you can't get the new plates that way. Here, it is only about 1/2 of the 08 renewals are with the new plates. Thus, in the future, it is going to be more common to not have them, than to have them.

Now, I have been meaning to start this thread for some time, just noting the observation. However, the ACLU has stepped in today and filed suit. Actually, the grounds for the suit are pretty simple: this is a specialty plate, and like other specialty plates, there should be an administrative fee. In fact, the legislature specifically waived the administrative fee for this plate, so they know darn well it is a specialty plate. Providing a special exemption for the religious specialty plate violates the establishment clause.

This would all be perfectly acceptable if they charged the adminstrative fee.

 

[Ian Osborne]

My thoughts on this one went up and down like a tart's knickers. First of all, I wondered what you were moaning about if it's optional, then I thought you might be getting hung up over trivia. By the end, though, I saw that you had it spot on. It would all be perfectly acceptable if they charged the adminstrative fee.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

What is their intention behind waiving the fee specifically for that plate?

I can only come up with an answer that would violate separation of Church and State.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

My father claims the God plate is actually cheaper. (The reason is that he used to have an environmental plate, which was more expensive, and the God plate, being the same cost as a plain one, is cheaper.)

 

[aerosolben]

Despite my personal feelings and Constitutional challenges, "In God We Trust" remains the motto of the United States. I think it would be tough to challenge this without some additional evidence demonstrating religious intent.

 

[slingblade]

My father claims the God plate is actually cheaper. (The reason is that he used to have an environmental plate, which was more expensive, and the God plate, being the same cost as a plain one, is cheaper.)

Then....you spread that savings across the other specialty plates, making them all somewhat cheaper.

But still more than plain.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Maybe I wasn't clear... My father is completely delusional. I'm sure he thinks the God plate costs less than the regular, but based on a false assumption because he used to have the environmental plate, not the regular.

Anyway.. The reason I bring it up at all is that it could be others think (wrongly) the same way and get the God plate because it seems cheaper. As a special plate, it is, but it's not cheaper than a regular but some may mistakenly think it actually is because they paid less than last year.

 

[slingblade]

Oh. Tell yer dad I'm running out of delusions and will take some off his hands for a small fee.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Only if that fee is slightly less than the cost of a God plate.

 

[mgidm86]

I think all of these specialized plates are ridiculous. There must be dozens of different designs here in California. You can even substitute the numbers and letters with graphics, like little hearts and other silly stuff.

Doesn't this make it difficult for police to identify which state a license plate is from?

"Yes, I'm in pursuit of a car, license plate '1-X-4-little heart thingy-waving hand-L-3'. I can't tell what state it's from, but it's red with little clouds and happy faces".

 

[frank462]

The suit filed by the ACLU in this matter has nothing to do with the "establishment clause" in the First Amendment.

The Indy Channel News

"Therefore, those who obtain an 'In God We Trust' license plate are afforded the opportunity to make an affirmative statement through display of the plate without any additional cost while Mr. Studler must pay additional fees for his environmental license plate," the complaint said.

ACLU-Indiana attorney Ken Falk said the suit has nothing to do with what is on the plate.

"This is not a church and state (issue)," Falk said. "We are not claiming this is a violation of the First Amendment."

Falk said the ACLU-Indiana doesn't object to continued sales of the plate, but it does want the state to charge the $15 administrative fee.

 

[Katana]

While I agree with the idea that, if you're going to charge for any specialty plate, you should charge for all specialty plates. However, with many such as the environmental plates, the extra fee goes to causes related to the plate's theme.

As the article states:

The plaintiff bringing the case, Mark Studler, said he paid an additional $40 for one of the popular environmental plates depicting an eagle above the word "Environment." Of the total fee, $25 goes to a state trust to purchase land set aside for conservation or recreational purposes and the remaining $15 is for the administrative fee.

While I resent "In God We Trust" being on anything distributed by or displayed by the government, it's not going away any time soon. However, I certainly wouldn't want them settling this lawsuit by agreeing to charge a fee and setting aside a portion of it for religious organizations.

That said, they could easily decide to donate the money to secular causes.

 

[pgwenthold]

While I agree with the idea that, if you're going to charge for any specialty plate, you should charge for all specialty plates. However, with many such as the environmental plates, the extra fee goes to causes related to the plate's theme.

Of the $40 that you pay for an environmental plate, $25 goes to the environmental fund, whereas $15 is the "administrative fee." This is the fee that is paid just for the concept of having a specialty plate, and is separate from the other donation.

Thus, even if there were no donation to the environmental fund, you would have to pay the administrative fee.

 

[frank462]

While I resent "In God We Trust" being on anything distributed by or displayed by the government, it's not going away any time soon. However, I certainly wouldn't want them settling this lawsuit by agreeing to charge a fee and setting aside a portion of it for religious organizations.

That said, they could easily decide to donate the money to secular causes.

I totally agree. However the lawsuit is only asking that the $15 administrative fee be added. That fee is kept by the state only. No additional money will be collected, like the addtitional $25 for the environmental plate, to be distributed to anyone.

 

[Katana]

Of the $40 that you pay for an environmental plate, $25 goes to the environmental fund, whereas $15 is the "administrative fee." This is the fee that is paid just for the concept of having a specialty plate, and is separate from the other donation.

Thus, even if there were no donation to the environmental fund, you would have to pay the administrative fee.

Oops. You're right. I missed the fact that the lawsuit was only going after the administrative part even though that's mentioned in the OP AND in the link provided by frank462.

Nice reading, Katana.

 

[pgwenthold]

The suit filed by the ACLU in this matter has nothing to do with the "establishment clause" in the First Amendment.

The Indy Channel News

If that is the claim, then the case has no merit.

There is nothing preventing the legislature from providing fee waivers to anything they want. Every once in a while, they legislature has, for example, waived the gas tax on regular gas. If they didn't waive the tax on diesel, would there be grounds for a suit? No, they can waive fees for any reason they want.

Any secular reason, that is. The constitution prevents them from waiving fees in order to promote religion.

If the legislature decided to waive the fee on the Colts plate after the Super Bowl, they could do it.

 

[frank462]

If that is the claim, then the case has no merit.

There is nothing preventing the legislature from providing fee waivers to anything they want. Every once in a while, they legislature has, for example, waived the gas tax on regular gas. If they didn't waive the tax on diesel, would there be grounds for a suit? No, they can waive fees for any reason they want.

Any secular reason, that is. The constitution prevents them from waiving fees in order to promote religion.

If the legislature decided to waive the fee on the Colts plate after the Super Bowl, they could do it.

It will be interesting to see if the courts agree with you. I suspect that they won't, not for any legal reason but for a monetary one. If they rule in favor of the ACLU it will mean some more revenue for the state.

 

[strathmeyer]

Now I have something to do with all of these tiny stickers that just say "freedom of religion".

 

[Tailgater]

Thanks for the thread Pg. I live in Indiana and was not aware this had happened. I just use the automated machine at the front door to get the sticker. These plates are real popular here. Fifteen bucks a plate would have been a lot of revenue for the state to do something useful (like fixing the roads!).

 

[JamesDillon]

If that is the claim, then the case has no merit.

There is nothing preventing the legislature from providing fee waivers to anything they want. Every once in a while, they legislature has, for example, waived the gas tax on regular gas. If they didn't waive the tax on diesel, would there be grounds for a suit? No, they can waive fees for any reason they want.

Any secular reason, that is. The constitution prevents them from waiving fees in order to promote religion.

If the legislature decided to waive the fee on the Colts plate after the Super Bowl, they could do it.

I'm not sure that's true. The Establishment Clause argument strikes me as rather weak, largely because that odious saying is an official motto of the United States. Without having given it a lot of thought, I think that the best line of attack (not sure if this is the ACLU's plan or not) would be on free speech or equal protection grounds. With respect to the first, the practice of providing an administrative-charge-free God plate, while charging $15 for other plates, arguably operates as a sorta-content-based prior restraint, to the extent that increasing the costs of some expressive conduct on the basis of content can be called a "restraint" (I lack the expertise in this area to know the answer to that question). In other words, if the government makes it cost more to make some statements (e.g., save the environment) than others (In God We Trust), then it's arguably violating the free speech rights of people who want to engage in the former kind of speech. That seems a bit of a stretch, but I don't think it's a ridiculous argument. With respect to equal protection, you could argue that the government is imposing a burden on the class of people who want non-God specialized plates that doesn't apply to people who want God plates; the state would have to justify that practice by arguing that it is rationally related to a legitimate purpose, which is a pretty deferential test, but offhand I can't think of what that purpose might be. The Establishment Clause argument seems like a loser to me because I'm not sure we can say that offering this license plate, regardless of the cost, constitutes an "entanglement" of government and religion.