Video screens were first introduced into vehicles to entertain children in the backseat and put an end to the ever-persistent question: "Are we there yet?" The new feature was an instant success. Tennessee, Louisiana, and Virginia now have measures in place governing in-car video screen content. This Comment evaluates Supreme Court precedent and analyses what latitude, if any, states have to control video screen content without infringing First Amendment rights. State statutes controlling in-car video screen content vary in breadth and legislative intent. This delicate balance, however, also leads to the ultimate conclusion that there is little room for legislating the content of in-car video screens outside of the obscenity exception according to the Miller standard. The only content-neutral laws that exist in states to date prohibit video screen operation, placement in the driver's view, or both. The Court's endorsement of legislation restricting the manner in which material is directed at viewers suggests that legislation preventing "visual assault" could apply even to video screens like those on the "mobile protest" vehicle in Hindi. Many states have not restricted in-car video screen placement or content. As the in-car video screen industry expands, however, states like Texas cannot continue to ignore problems potentially posed by driver distraction. (Author/publisher)
Abstract