The proposed license plate deemed unconstitutional in last weeks U.S. District Court ruling
Score one for the good guys. After months of waiting on what was an absolutely inevitable decision, It was finally time on Wednesday for the rational people of South Carolina to stand up and cheer after U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie ruled that South Carolina’s state-issued “I Believe” license plate is unconstitutional. It was a good week for the separation of church and state here in the Palmetto State.
In her decision Judge Currie wrote “Such a law amounts to state endorsement not only of religion in general, but of a specific sect in particular.” Currie went on to condemn the law in fairly strong terms, implying that the politicians involved in passing it should have known better saying, “Whether motivated by sincerely held Christian beliefs or an effort to purchase political capital with religious coin, the result is the same,” adding that “The statute is clearly unconstitutional and defense of its implementation has embroiled the state in unnecessary (and expensive) litigation.” Judge Currie also ordered the state to pay the legal costs for the complainants
Honestly, any idiot with the slightest bit of legal understanding could’ve foreseen this outcome. One idiot in particular predicted things going down pretty much exactly this way better than ten months ago. As it happens, that idiot was me.
Back in January, before I was writing this column for the Spark, I wrote a blog post about the controversy, specifically about how two gubernatorial candidates who also conveniently happened to be two of the “I Believe” tag’s biggest boosters, Attorney General Henry McMaster and Lt. Governor Andre Bauer, attended a rally supporting the license plate in a Greenville County church where the Pastor said that the four complainants in the case were going to “burn in hell”.
McMaster and Bauer’s participation in the rally and their support for the “I Believe” tag was simple political rabble-rousing. The conservative Christian vote will, in all likelihood, decide who gets the GOP nomination for governor next year, and courting that voting block with a little red meat is always a good political strategy down here in SC even if it’s obvious to anyone with the slightest bit of political acumen what the real name of the game is.
Understanding how the political pandering game works is unfortunately not a prerequisite for voting
Questions of political acumen aside, it was obvious how this case was going to turn out right from the start to anyone who’d bothered to pay attention because of the “I Believe” law’s obvious failure to meet the legal precedent established in the landmark Lemon v. Kurtzman Supreme Court case. The so-called “Lemon Test” establishes three criteria for deciding whether or not a religious law violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The criteria are:
- The government’s action must have a secular legislative purpose;
- The government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
- The government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion.
Anybody can read those three criteria and see pretty easily that the “I Believe” plates don’t pass the “Lemon Test” and thus, violate the Establishment Clause. My question now about all this is basically the same question I had back in January: if a blogger in Spartanburg with no legal training can figure this out with a couple of hours worth of case study using nothing more complicated than Google, why couldn’t the Attorney General or the Lt. Governor of the State of South Carolina do the same? Either Andre Bauer and Henry McMaster are the two dumbest people ever to be elected to office in South Carolina history or they really, really want Evangelical Christians to come out to vote for “one of their own” in the GOP primary.
Guess which one I think is most likely.
After the law creating the plates had been struck down, self-appointed Christian soldier Andre Bauer moved into full martyr mode decrying the ruling as “another attack on Christianity” and calling Judge Currie a “liberal judge appointed by (President) Bill Clinton” saying that she “was using her personal wishes to overrule the Legislature and the will of the thousands of South Carolinians who want to purchase the tags.”
Henry McMaster, perhaps better at sensing when a political horse had been beaten to death, sought to broaden his focus. In a video released Thursday, McMaster touted his track record defending “religious freedom” specifically mentioning his failed bid to defend the town of Great Falls in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of a Wiccan woman over the town opening its council meetings with a Christian prayer. Though he lost that one, McMaster is quick to point out that “If the ACLU sues you, call me up” adding that “one day, I believe that the U.S. Supreme Court will realize that they’ve gone off the deep end with their rulings against prayer.”
One heart-stopping serving of conservative, demagogic red meat coming right up.
What may be the saddest thing about all this—besides the amount of taxpayer money spent on the whole thing—is that no matter how this thing had turned out, McMaster and Bauer still get to keep using it as an issue to rally the social conservative base. If, unlikely as it was, the “I Believe” tag hadn’t been struck down, Bauer and McMaster could’ve declared victory over the “secularization of society”, or whatever other nonsensical phrase they’d have chosen to use. Now that it’s gone down to defeat, they get to play the “persecution of Christianity” card. The beauty—or tragedy—of this tag issue, is that from a political standpoint, there’s no way Bauer or McMaster could lose.
In fact, in a certain way failure is far more useful to both McMaster and Bauer than success. Throwing rocks at “liberal” judges is a time-tested method of getting conservatives, especially social conservatives, out to the polls. There’s a narrative at work within the conservative movement that relies on them being able to articulate their views in “underdog” terms. It’s a corrupt and godless world out there dominated by liberals bent on unmaking America, the narrative goes, and though the odds are stacked against them, they intend to keep fighting the good fight because theirs is a righteous cause.
It’s all a giant fiction of course, but its a fiction that the conservative movement has been perpetuating to great effect for years. I have to admit, I’m always a little stunned that it works so well here in South Carolina where conservative Republicans control basically all facets of state government, and get things their way something like 90 percent of the time, but for whatever reason GOP voters here keep buying the same line over and over.
Leaving all that aside though, last Wednesday’s ruling is a rare, but much-needed, victory for sanity here in South Carolina. Despite the fact that demagogues like Henry McMaster and Andre Bauer will use this to stir the pot for themselves, we got a win for a change. I intend to raise my glass to that fact in the hopes that in the future, the taste of victory mingling with my ale won’t be so unfamiliar.
Christopher George
As always well done. I was surprised when I move to SC that such license plates were offered, but I do admit that for a time my cars sported such plates, my husband preferred them. I just liked the design a bit better then the regular ones. He is much more conservative then I am. I remember thinking then that it was a possibility of over-stepping boundaries between church and state, but really didn’t dwell that much on it at the time.
I now have the pretty new palmetto tree with the sunrise on my car. I think that when it looked like this whole mess was going to go down on the side against the “I believe ” tags, all of use who currently owned one had them replaced. I am unsure on that, I just know I had to get a new tag.
Now granted I am a Christian, attend church regularly and have a strong set of moral standards. I do not agree with using the pulpit as a political bargaining chip, I find it highly inappropriate, yet both Republicans and Democrats use that. I do not think that, claiming “I stand for Christian values” it has a strong stance, especially considering how those who claim they uphold the church and its standards so strongly are often the ones who end up looking like complete hypocrites with their personal words and actions. St. Francis of Assisi is credited with saying “preach the gospel daily, if necessary use words.” He mentioned nothing about using religion as a means for an end in politics. Maybe that is because he knew that politicians use far too many words, with far too little relevant actions.
One last thing, crying persecution when one doesn’t get their way on a clear legal precedence is plain old childish. They haven’t a clue what real religious persecution is. In fact unless one personally fled a nation in fear of their very lives to live here in the US, one would have a very difficult time understanding religious persecution. Losing a court battle on what is really a minor issue hardly qualifies.
“In fact unless one personally fled a nation in fear of their very lives to live here in the US, one would have a very difficult time understanding religious persecution.”
Thanks Sylvia — those words resonated with me. While I can’t claim the most extreme form of religious persecution, as a non-Christian, gay man, living with AIDS, I was compelled to leave Spartanburg 14 years ago for Oregon. Quit simply, I feared for my job, my ability to get proper medical care because of my disease (which happened), and at times, even my safety. Like clockwork, several times a week, a vehemently anti-gay letter would be published in the Herald-Journal, feeding the masses, a pious co-worker would tell me how certain people would burn in hell and how when visiting New York he’d like to bash the faggots over the head with a baseball bat, or at times, someone would quit my church, because it was not perceived as “Christian” enough and it could affect their career.
The emotional and spiritual toll of living in Spartanburg if you’re not part of the accepted majority can be overwhelming. It is of little doubt that if I had stayed in SC, I would have died long ago. No, I’m not anti-Christian. As a Unitarian, I often embrace Christian culture, ideas, and even theology. But as someone who has spent many years living and traveling overseas, I’ve too often seen the tyranny of a religious or political majority over the minority. To experience it personally in a hometown where one has grown up (and should feel safe) is particularly bitter, and can destroy one’s soul.
While having an “I believe” license plate with the requisite graphics may be an sincere expression of faith by many Christians, for many others it is clearly an “in your face” assault to gain and retain power and control in the culture and politics of SC. They’re not stupid. They know to insure their continued political control they must rile up their majority, and either drive the minority into submission, or drive them away all together. I think, more than in any other state, in South Carolina, that has become the norm.
The sad thing is will be that the religious right will cry “persecution!” over the current ruling, never knowing what religious persecution is all about.
And … as Christopher said, Bauer and McMaster still won.
“And … as Christopher said, Bauer and McMaster still won.”
I think it’s worth noting, however, that they only won in relative terms and with a specific segment of the population. From a legal point of view, they completely and totally lost. Nothing is stopping someone who wants to let other people know about their faith from buying a bumper sticker — I’m all for that — but it has been made clear that the state can’t be endorsing such religious views officially.
It’s just another sign that there’s a significant cultural shift happening in this state, and that the old system is rapidly losing power, control and influence. And that hardcore social conservative base they keep catering to is getting smaller and smaller with each election year, and the more they ally themselves with it, the more opportunities there are for other points of view to make it into government.
/end pollyanna rant
I wonder how the “I Believe” crowd would have felt if the verdict had read something like:
” You can keep your “I Believe” but you much add a graphic for the top 10/25/50/100 internationally recognized dogmas, such as Judaism, Wicca, Islam, Pagan, Druid, Hindu, Buddhist, etc, etc.”
Now, THAT I would like to see rolling down the higway!
Rant away Steve. My political views tend to be more along the middle and I have said more then once that both ends of the political spectrum have some value, but the polarization has to stop as well as using religion to garner voters.
What frosts my well padded behind on that is that these are the same people who cry foul when other parties, groups or even nations use similar tactics. They go on and on about freedom, but I wonder if they really understand what freedom means or the responsibility it demands?
It is sad that people like gb feel the need to leave their home because of the environmental setting placed by the people around him. For that I am truly sorry. That people who supposedly equate themselves with love, compassion, respect and forgiveness displayed anything but dismays me greatly. I have yet to find a “love anyone but” clause in the bible, and yet I am seeing it more and more in our culture.
I hope that you can return one day gb and find that your hometown has grown up and you can see that we recognize the wealth of individuals whether or not their views, faith or political affiliation line up with yours or not.
It’s all just to make money. Religion is a corporation like any other.
Whew!
That was a close one. Next we would find people sporting “In God We Trust” license plates.
http://www.scdmvonline.com/VehPlateSpecialty.aspx
It could even be imprinted on coins!
thank goodness for progressive judges and google intellectuals.
I have been saved!
I didn’t even know there were that many different kinds of plates. Ah but those are specialty plates that you pay extra for right? Wonder if a compromise could have been given and the “in God We Trust” plate had been added to that instead of one of two choices for regular plates? If that had happened the state would have saved a bundle in legal and processing fees, and Baur and Co. would have had less to spout off about.
I dunno Sylvie.
I do know this. Mr. George did write a well researched, intelligent piece on this subject.
cm