The Fourteenth Amendment and the Court’s interpretations, besides defining citizenship, guarantees that no state may bridge the privileges or immunities of citizens, deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law or deny anyone within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. So what exactly is due process of law? Due process prohibits a variety of social and economic regulations, recognizes many fundamental rights such as privacy, requires certain hearings before taking action against a citizen and guards against conflicts of interest in courts of law.
Fundamental rights are like a set of guidelines under the law that says human rights are protected under our Constitution and so are given a high respect in our courts when there are conflicts between individual liberty and governmental infringement. Although many fundamental rights are widely considered to be human rights, the classification of a right as fundamental invokes specific legal tests used by our courts.
Fundamental rights are generally accepted and recognized as including but not limited to, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to freedom of movement within the country, the right to freedom of association, the right to freedom of speech, the right to equal protection under the law, the right to freedom of thought -- in a nutshell, freedom and equal treatment for all. So, the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees our fundamental rights and our fundamental rights guarantee our freedom of speech along with the First Amendment. Our freedom of speech then, is covered under both Amendment Fourteen and One. But, does a patch or colors constitute freedom of speech? According to our Courts, that’s not necessarily so.
Many bikers argue that under the First Amendment it is unconstitutional to ban colors as it is a violation of their freedom of speech, expression and expressive association rights. As far as I know, a patch has never been considered or ruled protected speech under any court of law. It’s been ruled that a patch does not convey a particular message. My personal opinion is that, if the courts are ruling that a patch does not convey a particular message, why in the hell is anyone banning it in the first place?
So why then is it allowed for a business, a city, a state or any other political entity to mandate that a biker who wears colors be denied access or service to an establishment, a city drag race, a fair or any other event? Ah, you say, it’s because bikers and biker gangs are bad and we don’t want bad people rubbing elbows with we good people. Business owners may even say they have the right to refuse service to anyone. Yet, in towns across America, many of those same businesses hypocritically salute bikers by displaying huge banner welcome signs when a big rally occurs so they can collect extra revenue.
Cops reason that bikers are gang members, do illegal acts and are no better than street gangs such as the Crips and Bloods. They say the ban is to guarantee public safety. My old man doesn’t fly MC colors and has been a biker for 50 years give or take a few. He’s been an associate and supporter long before it became trendy and has been pulled over with or without those who were flying colors; just for being a biker. He doesn’t get pulled over now (knock on wood) like he did in the old days when there weren’t color bans. Back then, bikers got pulled over, harassed and put in jail; overnight if they were lucky and came up with no warrants. Today, if the cops did so, they might be pulling over doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs.
When regular motorcycle enthusiasts took to the two-wheeled mode of transportation and spent loads of money doing so, they fueled a movement to become trendy wannabe bikers. Harley Davidson cashed in and formed the Harley Owners' Group. They wear a patch. I have nothing against the group, so don’t write me nasty letters, but the HOG Group is not an MC; it is a polite group of people who like to show off their shiny waxed bikes, replete with plenty of custom after market doo dads, wear designer leather and ride with like-minded people. They wear chaps with fringe and Conchos, jackets with huge Harley Davidson Logos and spend, spend, spend at the Harley Boutiques; motorcycle boutiques that were once dirty bike shops where a man came in and spit on the floor, grabbed his crotch and sat at a stool at the parts counter full of ashtrays to order bike parts, look at pictures of nasty women draped on motorcycles, and bull shit. Definitely not like the thousands of bike shops or majority of bike riders we see today.
Why is the color and patch banning more of an issue today than long ago? Probably because of the sheer numbers of bikers who have burst onto the scene in the last 10 to 20 years. Even probably because motorcycle clubs, bikers, motorcycle enthusiasts and wannabe bikers are more litigious in our present day. Today, a club is more likely to scream, “I know my rights,” and file suit when they feel their rights have been violated. In the old days, a dirty scooter trash biker felt lucky if he escaped being jailed or worse. Then, bikers hung out at biker bars, clubhouses or flop-houses and stayed away from cocktail lounges that didn’t want them. Today’s bikers have joined the long lines of litigious multitudes eager to file their complaints, suits and grievances. Maybe it will work and someday the banning of colors will be prohibited just as the banning of people of color was prohibited when they finally abolished the Jim Crow Laws of the Old South.
Peace to you all whatever you may choose.
Nancy Frye-Swope
The Retired Biker Housewife
Nancy Frye-Swope 2010 © All Rights Reserved
