3

I'm in Michigan. There are a few scenarios.

  1. I hang a sign by a string to a person's car
  2. I attach a sticker to the window of a car
  3. Using washable window paint, I draw on a car window.

Are any of these illegal? Are any considered to be vandalism, defacing, or malicious destruction?

2
  • 3
    I don't think "free speech" enters into this question: Freedom of expression is constitutionally protected, but there is no natural or constitutional right to expression using someone else's property!
    – feetwet
    Commented Dec 6, 2015 at 22:35
  • 1
    What about the people who put the slips of paper under your wiper blade?
    – Alex Volpe
    Commented Dec 7, 2015 at 15:43

1 Answer 1

4

Damaging someone else's property is not protected free speech in the US. Nor is using someone else's property without permission and against the owner's wishes.

Scenario 3 would surely be vandalism or "Malicious Mischief" or some similar offense, even if the paint can be fairly easily removed. The same would be petty surely true of scenario 2, as it would take at least some effort to remove the sticker, and it could be a safety hazard until it is removed (obstructed vision).

Scenario 1 would probably not be even a minor crime, unless perhaps the person trespassed to attach the string. But the person has no right to insist that the car's owner not remove the sign.

I am assuming that the car is owned by someone else, and the the person placing the sign, sticker or paint acted without permission from the owner or any authorized person.

2
  • Free speech sometimes is unpopular speech with negative consequences. If A creates the false impression that the sign expresses B's opinions, and B suffers consequences from that, would A have to pay damages, even in case 1?
    – gnasher729
    Commented Apr 6, 2022 at 8:37
  • 1
    @gnasher729 That would be a defamation case, with all the problems of defamation cases in political issues. Plaintiff would need to p[rove that reasonable people could be, and some had been, misled as to his or her views and that damage had resulted. Plaintiff might need to show actual malice. Plaintiff would need to at least allege falsity. And even so, that would not be a criminal action. It would not be "vandalism, defacing, or malicious destruction". Commented Apr 6, 2022 at 14:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .