A woman from Sacramento, California, is challenging the decision of the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to revoke her personalized license plate, which she argues reflects her name and heritage. The plate, which reads “IAMISIS,” was deemed offensive by the DMV on the grounds that it could incite violence.
Isis Wharton, who has paid an annual fee of $50 since 2022 for her personalized plate, stated that the DMV’s interpretation of her name is misguided. In her view, “Isis” originates from the ancient Egyptian goddess symbolizing healing and maternal love, rather than the terrorist organization commonly associated with the name today. Wharton expressed her feelings of hurt and offense at the DMV’s decision, emphasizing that her name should not be linked with violence.
The DMV maintains that the plate could be interpreted as a reference to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, a group known for its violent actions worldwide. In a letter explaining the revocation, the DMV noted that the plate “creates a risk of inciting violence,” which falls under the agency’s criteria for rejecting personalized plates.
Regulations Governing Personalized Plates
California law allows for personalized license plates, provided they adhere to specific guidelines set by the DMV. Plates can be rejected if they contain sexual or scatological meanings, profanity, or messages that could be seen as offensive to particular groups based on race, religion, or sexual orientation.
According to the DMV, they aim to review each application carefully, recognizing that language can carry different meanings in various cultural contexts. A DMV statement remarked, “What may be a term of affection in one context can be perceived differently in another.”
Wharton is determined to contest the DMV’s ruling, viewing it as an opportunity to reclaim her name and its powerful connotations. “That’s why I choose to fight,” she said, highlighting her desire to shift the narrative surrounding the name “Isis” away from negative associations.
Previous Cases of Contested License Plates
Wharton is not the first individual to face difficulties with personalized license plates in California. Steve Gordon, the director of the DMV, has previously received complaints from residents who felt their plates were unjustly rejected. In 2020, five residents claimed that their plates were denied based on unconstitutional speech restrictions.
Among the contested plates were terms that the DMV argued could be interpreted as threatening or offensive. Examples included “OGWOOLF,” which referenced a band, and “QUEER,” which the DMV considered degrading to a specific group. In a significant ruling, a court found in favor of several drivers, affirming that their personalized plates were protected under the First Amendment as private speech.
As Wharton prepares to appeal the DMV’s decision, her case underscores the complexities surrounding language, personal identity, and the interpretations of state agencies. The outcome could set a precedent for how personalized license plates are regulated in the future, balancing the need for public safety with individual expression.
