Woman Fights DMV Over Revocation of Personalized Plate “IAMISIS”

Isis Wharton, a Sacramento resident, is appealing the California Department of Motor Vehicles’ (DMV) decision to revoke her personalized license plate, which reads “IAMISIS.” The DMV deemed the plate offensive, citing concerns that it could incite violence. Wharton, who has paid an annual fee of $50 since 2022, argues that her name originates from the ancient Egyptian goddess and should not be linked to any terrorist affiliations.

The DMV stated that the plate could be interpreted as “I am the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria,” connecting it to a global terrorist organization responsible for numerous violent acts. In a letter from the DMV, Wharton was informed that her plate posed a risk of inciting violence, a claim she strongly contests.

“I was very surprised that they were doing this after so many years,” Wharton told The Times. “I felt hurt and offended by them, which implies that my name was something that would incite violence.” Wharton plans to challenge the DMV’s decision, emphasizing that her name represents healing and maternal love, not hostility. “I choose to fight because I believe this could be a great example of bringing back the powerful and peaceful name Isis,” she asserted.

DMV’s Criteria for License Plate Approval

The California DMV has established specific criteria for approving personalized license plates. These plates can be rejected if they contain sexual or scatological meanings, profane terms, or messages that could be perceived as offensive based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. Plates that imply violence or illegal activities are also subject to rejection.

The DMV clarified its position, stating that language and symbols can carry different meanings across cultures. What may be an affectionate term in one context could be interpreted negatively in another. According to their policy, plates that might misrepresent affiliations with government or law enforcement are also disallowed.

Precedents in Plate Rejections

Wharton is not alone in facing challenges with her personalized license plate. In 2020, Steve Gordon, the director of the DMV, received complaints from five residents regarding the rejection of their plates. They argued that the DMV imposed unconstitutional speech restrictions based on content and viewpoint, violating the First Amendment.

Among the contested plates were terms like “OGWOOLF,” which the DMV claimed referenced a band, and “SLAAYRR,” interpreted as potentially aggressive. Other rejected plates included “QUEER,” deemed offensive; “DUKNA,” which the DMV argued resembled inappropriate language; and “BO11LUX,” which was not approved due to its sexual connotation.

The ongoing debate over personalized license plates raises questions about the balance between self-expression and public safety. Wharton’s case highlights the complexities of language interpretation, particularly in a multicultural society. As she continues her fight against the DMV, the outcome may set a significant precedent for similar disputes in the future.