Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 652

524US2

Unit: $U95

[09-06-00 18:40:44] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 524 U. S. 569 (1998)

607

Souter, J., dissenting

burning statute because it impermissibly prohibited speech
that was “disrespectful” of the ﬂag). The fact that the stat-
ute disfavors art insufﬁciently respectful of America’s “di-
verse” beliefs and values alters this conclusion not one whit:
the First Amendment does not validate the ambition to dis-
qualify many disrespectful viewpoints instead of merely one.
See Rosenberger, supra, at 831–832.

B

Another alternative for avoiding unconstitutionality that
the Court appears to regard with some favor is the Govern-
ment’s argument that the NEA may comply with § 954(d)
merely by populating the advisory panels that analyze grant
applications with members of diverse backgrounds. See
ante, at 577, 581. Would that it were so easy; this asserted
implementation of the law fails even to “reﬂec[t] a plausible
construction of the plain language of the statute.” Rust v.
Sullivan, 500 U. S. 173, 184 (1991).

The Government notes that § 954(d) actually provides that
“[i]n establishing . . . regulations and procedures, the Chair-
person [of the NEA] shall ensure that (1) artistic excellence
and artistic merit are the criteria by which applications are
judged, taking into consideration general standards of de-
cency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the
American public.” According to the Government, this lan-
guage requires decency and respect to be considered not in
judging applications, but in making regulations.
If, then,
the Chairperson takes decency and respect into consider-
ation through regulations ensuring diverse panels, the stat-
ute is satisﬁed. But it would take a great act of will to ﬁnd
any plausibility in this reading. The reference to consider-
ing decency and respect occurs in the subparagraph speaking
to the “criteria by which applications are judged,” not in the
preamble directing the Chairperson to adopt regulations; it
is in judging applications that decency and respect are most
It is no surprise, then, that the
obviously to be considered.