Court Upholds Your Right to Scrawl Profanity on Sullivan County Speeding Tickets

A federal judge ruled on September 14 that a Connecticut man's profanity-laced tirade on a speeding ticket is protected under the First Amendment.

William Barboza received the speeding ticket on May 4, 2012. Barboza wasn't happy about the ticket and let it be known by crossing out "Liberty" on the payment form and replaced it with "Tyranny." He then scrawled "F*** YOUR S****Y TOWN BITCHES" at the top of the ticket.

Local officials didn't take too kindly to Barboza's message, as Justice Brian P. Rourke informed Barboza in September of that year that his payment had been rejected and he'd have to travel to Liberty to appear in court.

Things went from bad to worse for Barboza, when prosecutors from the Sullivan County district attorney's office instructed police officers to arrest him on a charge of aggravated harassment. Barboza was taken to the Liberty police station, where he was booked, fingerprinted and handcuffed to a bench. He was eventually released when he paid a $200 bail.

However, another judge dismissed the charges against Barboza later in 2012, stating that “[n]o citation is necessary for this Court to determine that the language under the circumstances here, offensive as it is, is protected.”

Barboza along with the help of the NY Civil Liberties Union and attorney Stephen Bergstein filed a lawsuit against the town of Liberty, assistant district attorney Robert Zangla and the two officers who arrested Barboza. The suit alleged that the arrest had violated Barboza's First Amendment right to free speech.

Barboza's attorneys argued that officials in Liberty had misinterpreted New York's aggravated harassment statute. The statute says it's against the law for a person to "harass, annoy, threaten or alarm” someone "by telephone, by telegraph, or by mail, or by transmitting or delivering any other form of written communication."

Judge Cathy Seibel said that the message on the ticket, "though crude and offensive to some, did not convey an imminent threat and was made in the context of complaining about government activity," and therefore did not violate the statute.

Judge Seibel also said

The words here are not inherently likely to provoke violent reaction, they were not directed at anyone in particular, and could not be interpreted as threatening any particular action.

The judge stated that Assistant DA Robert Zangla is liable for damages because he violated Barboza’s clearly established constitutional rights, but that the two Liberty police officers are not liable because Zangla instructed them to make the arrest.