IBJNews

Personalized license plates on hold after ruling

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana residents eager to find out if they can personalize their license plates in light of a court ruling that the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles arbitrarily granted or withheld permission for the tags must wait while officials decide whether to appeal.

Marion County Judge James Osborn ruled last week that the BMV violated some vanity plate applicants' free speech rights by turning down some requests while allowing other similar plates.

The BMV was defended by the Indiana attorney general's office. Bryan Corbin, a spokesman for the office, said Tuesday that it was still considering whether to appeal. The agency has 30 days since the ruling last Thursday in which to appeal.

The BMV stopped offering vanity plates last July until the case was decided. A check of its website Tuesday showed there still was no way for motorists to apply for a personalized license plate.

Figures obtained from the BMV through a public records request by The Associated Press show that the number of personalized license plates sold had been increasing since 2011 until last year, when the BMV suspended applications. Since 2011, the number of vanity plates sold has increased by 20,000 annually, until last year, when it topped out at 86,000. That was just 6,000 more than the previous year. That number includes renewals, but not new applications after July, according to the BMV.

Vanity plate sales accounted for only 2.8 percent of the $103 million sent to license branches across the state in 2013, according to the BMV figures.

The original lawsuit was filed by Greenfield police Officer Rodney Vawter, whose "OINK" plate was revoked after three years because the BMV said its content was "offensive or misleading."

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed a lawsuit against the BMV based on Vawter's case in May 2013, and Osborn ruled against the state Thursday.

He said the BMV had no formal regulations in place for evaluating the content of vanity plates and ordered it to create formal standards that meet constitutional requirements within six months. It can use the old standards in the meantime, within limits such as barring profanity.

The BMV had cited a state statute that allowed it to refuse to issue a plate that officials deem to contain arranged letters and numbers that carry "a connotation offensive to good taste and decency" or that "would be misleading."

The court found the agency's use of its own standards was inconsistent and biased. For example, the agency revoked an "UNHOLY" vanity plate but allowed vanity plates such as "B HOLY" and "HOLYONE." The BMV also rejected the vanity plate "HATER" but accepted "HATE" and "HATERS."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

  2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

  3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

  4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

  5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

ADVERTISEMENT