Wooley v. Maynard

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Wooley v. Maynard
ArgueDate=November 29
ArgueYear=1976
DecideDate=April 20
DecideYear=1977
FullName=Neal R. Wooley v. George Maynard
USVol=430
USPage=705
Citation=97 S. Ct. 1428; 51 L. Ed. 2d 752; 1977 U.S. LEXIS 75
Prior=Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire
Subsequent=
OralArgument=http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_75_1453/argument/
Holding=New Hampshire could not constitutionally require citizens to display the state motto upon their vehicle license plates.
SCOTUS=1975-1981
Majority=Burger
JoinMajority=Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell, Stevens, White (in part)
Dissent=White (in part)
JoinDissent=Blackmun, and Rehnquist
Dissent2=Rehnquist
JoinDissent2=Blackmun
LawsApplied=

"Wooley v. Maynard", 430 U.S. 705 (1977), [ [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=430&page=705 430 U.S. 705] Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that New Hampshire could not constitutionally require citizens to display the state motto upon their vehicle license plates.

Introduction

Prior history

Facts of the case

A New Hampshire law required all noncommercial vehicles to bear license plates containing the state motto "Live Free or Die." George Maynard, a Jehovah's Witness, found the motto to be contrary to his religious and political beliefs and cut the words "or Die" off his plate. Maynard was convicted of violating the state law and was subsequently fined and given a jail sentence.

Decision of the Court

In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that New Hampshire could not constitutionally require citizens to display the state motto upon their vehicle license plates. The Court found that the statute in question effectively required individuals to "use their private property as a 'mobile billboard' for the State's ideological message." The Court held that the State's interests in requiring the motto did not outweigh free speech principles under the First Amendment, including "the right of individuals to hold a point of view different from the majority and to refuse to foster. . .an idea they find morally objectionable."

Minority opinions

Effects of the decision

Critical response

Subsequent history

References

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 430

External links

* [http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_75_1453/ Oyez: Wooley v. Maynard]