lesl at UDEL.EDU
Thu Aug 16 17:20:15 PDT 2001
this thread is probly dead by now, but I can't resist passing on an amusing
anecdote that is related. I have a brother-inlaw in Texas whose sense of
humor runs in scatological directions. For a long time his license plate
Finaly someone complained to the state board and they told him he could not
have it anymore because it was offensive (i.e. "contrary to public
policy"). So he changed it to "dreck" (yiddish for the same, but a mildly
offensive version, rather than a scientific term). This he was allowed to
Mark Tushnet wrote:
> John Noble questions whether it should be permissible that "[s]ome clerk
> in the DMV office is supposed to decide what is contrary to public
> policy." Suppose the elected Secretary of State directs that all
> denials be routed through his/her office for review by the Secretary.
> Does that change the analysis? [Does John know that this is *not* true?
> -- my guess is that, precisely for the reasons people are concerned
> about, denials are subject to some sort of internal review, although my
> guess is also that the review doesn't ordinarily include the Secretary
> of State.] More important, I'd note that this sort of analysis
> transforms a free speech analysis into a "due process of lawmaking" one.
More information about the Conlawprof