South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

A federal judge in South Carolina ruled today that it is unconstitutional for the state to issue the controversial "I Believe" license tags, which feature a picture of a cross over a stained glass window along with the phrase "I Believe."

Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer had pushed for the legislation authorizing the plates, and the Court noted in it's ruling that Bauer was attempting to accomplish

legislative approval of a specialty plate promoting the majority religion: Christianity. Whether motivated by sincerely held Christian beliefs or an effort to purchase political capital with religious coin, the result is the same. The statute is clearly unconstitutional and defense of its implementation has embroiled the state in unnecessary (and expensive) litigation.

Bauer is quoted as responding by saying:

"I don't expect anything different from a liberal judge who was appointed by Bill Clinton," Bauer said. "If she wants to single me out, so be it."

Bauer said it "once again shows how liberal judges are not just interpreting the law but making legislation."

The cliche "liberal judges legislating from the bench" is old and tired. The First Amendment to the Constitution says what it says, like it or not:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It is true that Christianity is the predominant religion in our country, and there is nothing wrong with that. The fact is that many provisions in the Constitution were put there specifically to protect those who are not in power - in this case, religions other than Christianity are decidedly a minority. Imagine the outcry if the state issued license tags promoting Islam. Our system of government is prohibited from endorsing any particular religion, including and especially the dominant one. Bauer, like the legislators who voted for this legislation, took an oath to uphold our Constitution - like many in government, they either are breaking that oath or they are demonstrating that they have not read the document they swore to uphold.

Using religion to grandstand and garner votes is reprehensible in my opinion and it is no different than legislators who lobby for harsher and harsher penalties for X criminal offense - it provides a platform to get attention, but it does nothing to serve the public interest.