This comment examines the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Wooley v. Maynard in which it held that a state can not make it a crime for a citizen to cover the state motto appearing on a citizen's car's license plate. The author begins by discussing the doctrine of compelled speech. The author then moves on to discuss symbolic speech. Next, the author examines the doctrine of Unconstitutional government speech. The author concludes that is it time for the judiciary to define the limits of governmental activities in the political machinery and that Wooley indicates the Court's willingness to set these boundaries.
Jay S. Bloom,
Unconstitutional Government Speech,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol15/iss4/9