The Buckeye Institute has joined the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) in submitting an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Gilliam v. Gerregano. The organizations are urging the court to review and clarify how the “government speech doctrine” applies, specifically regarding censorship of vanity license plates.
David C. Tryon, director of litigation at The Buckeye Institute, stated, “Vanity license plates convey messages of vehicle owners, not the government. This case exemplifies the government speech doctrine’s potential for abuse and overreach and underscores the urgent need for the high court to clarify its scope.”
The brief submitted by The Buckeye Institute and WILL contends that “[t]he government speech doctrine, which permits government to engage in its own expressive activity without First Amendment scrutiny, must be narrowly applied to prevent misuse and safeguard the free speech rights of all Americans.”
The legal challenge stems from a decision by Tennessee authorities to revoke Leah Gilliam’s license plate “69PWNDU,” after more than a decade of use. The revocation was based on a law banning plates deemed “offensive to good taste and decency.” Gilliam argues that this statute is overly broad under First Amendment protections.
Tryon added, “This case presents an opportunity to resolve courts’ inconsistent application of the government speech doctrine and to define its limits, ensuring it does not become a tool for censorship.”
