World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans

Article Id: WHEBN0047015969
Reproduction Date:

Title: Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Modern display of the Confederate flag, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Vehicle registration plates of the United States, Lost Cause of the Confederacy, Segraves v. California
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans

Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans
Argued March 23, 2015
Decided June 18, 2015
Full case name John Walker, III, Chairman, Texas Department of Motor Vehicles Board, et al., Petitioners v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., et al.
Docket nos. 14–144
Citations 576 U.S. ___ (more)
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Breyer, joined by Thomas, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan
Dissent Alito, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I

Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, 576 U.S. ___ (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that license plates are government speech and are consequently more easily regulated/subjected to content restrictions than private speech under the First Amendment.

The Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans sought to have a specialty license plate issued in the state of Texas. The request was denied prompting the group to sue, claiming that denying a specialty plate was a First Amendment violation.[1]


  • Opinion of the Court 1
  • Charleston shooting 2
  • See also 3
  • References 4
  • External links 5

Opinion of the Court

The majority opinion, written by Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, relied heavily on the Court’s 2009 decision in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, which said that a city in Utah did not have to make room in a public park for a monument celebrating the tenets of minor religion even though the park included a donated Ten Commandments monument. The monuments the city chose to accept, the court said, were the government's speech. And when the government speaks, the court added, it is free to say what it likes."[1]

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, arguing that specialty license plates are more commonly regarded as a limited public forum for private expression, consisting of "little mobile billboards on which motorists can display their own messages". Therefore, rejecting the design basically amounts to viewpoint discrimination.[2]

Charleston shooting

In part because of the proximity in time of the Supreme Court's decision (June 18, 2015) with the Charleston church shooting (the evening of June 17, 2015), the decision was discussed in the media in relation to a controversy which arose in response to the shooting. The massacre was directed at nine African-American churchgoers at one of the oldest black churches in the United States. One of the victims, the Reverend Clementa C. Pinckney, was a member of the South Carolina Senate. The suspected shooter, Dylann Roof, was found to have been depicted in images with Confederate flags, including one with a Confederate flag on a license plate. At the time of the shooting, the Confederate battle flag flew over the South Carolina State House.

As an example of Walker's relevance to the controversy, on June 23, 2015, following the massacre at Charleston, three state governors—Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (a Democrat), Pat McCrory of North Carolina (a Republican), and Larry Hogan of Maryland (a Republican) announced plans to seek discontinuation of their state's Confederate-flag specialty license plates.[3] The governors cited the Supreme Court's decision in Walker in support of their position.[3]

Prophetically but coincidentally relevant to the controversy, Associate Justice Alito, writing for the dissent, discussed the meaning of the Confederate flag to different social groups:

The Confederate battle flag is a controversial symbol. To the Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans, it is said to evoke the memory of their ancestors and other soldiers who fought for the South in the Civil War. To others, it symbolizes slavery, segregation, and hatred.

See also


  1. ^ a b  
  2. ^ "Slip opinion" (PDF). U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved October 21, 2015. 
  3. ^ a b Jess Bravin, Governors Seek to Curb Confederate Flag License Plates: Moves follow Charleston mass killing, Supreme Court ruling, Wall Street Journal (June 23, 2015).

External links

  • Slip opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from World eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.