Are Flashers Protected by Free Speech Laws?
Did you hear about the recent legal decision in Missouri?
Flashers are now protected by free speech laws.
According to a federal judge in St. Louis, flashing in public is permitted by the First Amendment. Laws prohibiting flashing violate the individual right to free speech.
Okay, so we’re talking about a different kind of “flashing” here. Not perverts standing around in raincoats. More like cars driving down the highway who warn other drivers.
Gotcha’ for a moment there, didn’t I?
The court’s ruling addresses the act of flashing car headlights, a common practice among experienced motorists who warn visible oncoming traffic of an approaching speed trap, or the presence of a patrol car. Flashing headlights basically means “slow down, there’s a cop up ahead.” It’s a courtesy that was probably started by truckers, which is now understood by just about everyone who does a lot of highway driving. When you see headlights flashing, especially for no reason at all (such as during the daytime), the message is clear — slow down! Otherwise, you’ll probably get a speeding ticket.
I was surprised by the judge’s decision, which could have serious ramifications not just for drivers, but for far more controversial procedures relating to law and order. One would think the act of flashing headlights — which has the clear intent of impeding standard procedures of law enforcement (radar guns which catch speeders) — would be frowned upon by a body (the court) that presumably understands the need to conceal police presence in order to catch lawbreakers.
Using a different example, let’s say I observe law enforcement assembled in the neighborhood. So, I run across the street to warn my friends who are the suspects they’re about to be raided by the police. Is that action protected under free speech laws? Perhaps the better question to be asked is — should that speech be protected by law?
What if I observe a suspect being chased down the street fleeing the police? Am I permitted to convey information to the person running away that might allow him to escape? “Hey Joe, run down the alley to your left — there are no police cars over there!” Can I say that? If so, where do we draw the line? Though not nearly as serious, isn’t the act of headlight flashing pretty much the same thing? After all, by doing any of these things I’m actively and knowingly inhibiting the standard procedures of law enforcement.
A George Washington University law professor commented as follows:
This has sweeping implications for the First Amendment. What this citizen is doing is warning other citizens about the violation of the law. People regularly warn others about the possibility of arrest. There’s no difference between a verbal warning and a mechanical warning. Both are forms of speech.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), an organization I both respect and support, applauded the judge’s decision. In general, I share their mission, that we constantly need the reaffirmation of protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
At the same time, I do wonder where individual rights must end for the greater good of society. We can’t all be permitted to go around doing whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want, because the result would then be chaotic. Society must have rules in place that are universally understood and respected, and they should be enforced. Moreover, law enforcement must be permitted to use standard tools of pursuit in order to maintain public safety.
As to where I stand, I see it both ways. What do you think?
READ: Remember When the Christian Right was for Free Speech?
