A Tennessee woman is asking the Supreme Court to rule that vanity license plates are personal — not government — speech and cannot be censored by the state.
Leah Gilliam has had “69PWNDU” as her vanity license plate for 11 years. She says she is a gamer and “PWND” has to do with being defeated in the gaming community, while 69 is the year of the moon landing.
But the license plate was revoked after Justin Moorhead, the chief of staff at the Tennessee Department of Revenue, was notified in a 2021 text message about it.
Tennessee state law allows vanity license plates that are misleading or “offensive to good taste and decency” to be rejected or denied by state officials.
Ms. Gilliam sued, arguing that Tennessee violated the First Amendment by discriminating against her viewpoint. But the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled against her, reasoning that people perceive custom vanity license plates as government speech.
“At its essence, government speech occurs when the government purposefully expresses a government message through those authorized to speak on its behalf. When a car owner pays a special fee to create and express her ‘own unique message,’ the public reasonably perceives that expression as the car owner’s, not the government’s,” Ms. Gilliam’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court reads.
In 2015, the Supreme Court considered the issue of vanity plates in a dispute out of Texas.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices ruled against the Sons of Confederate Veterans, which wanted to adopt custom plates with the Confederate flag on them. The justices said people understand license plates to be government — not private — speech and the state can deny vanity plates without violating the First Amendment.
Ms. Gilliam’s attorneys argue in her Supreme Court petition that the 2015 decision has led to varying results, with some Americans getting their preferred vanity plates while others are denied.
“Nearly every state has a program like Tennessee’s. And as one would expect, government discretion has resulted in a dizzying array of censorship,” they said.
For example, Arizona has permitted “JESUSNM” but has rejected “JESUSRX” and “NOGOD.”
Vermont has prohibited “JN36TN,” a reference to Bible verse John 3:16. Ohio has banned “LET’S GO B,” in reference to “Let’s Go Brandon” — an anti-Biden chant. And Texas has prohibited “JAIL 45.”
Tennessee waived its right to respond to Ms. Gilliam’s petition. A spokesperson for the attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The case is Leah Gilliam v. David Gerregano, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Revenue.
It would take four justices to vote in favor of hearing the dispute for oral arguments to be granted during the 2025-2026 term, which begins in October.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.