CHP Can’t 86 Indivisible Santa Barbara’s Sign

A routine Thursday afternoon protest on Santa Barbara's Micheltorena Street overpass turned into a constitutional confrontation last week, when two California Highway Patrol officers ordered members of Indivisible Santa Barbara to take down a sign reading "8647" and told the group the display amounted to wishing death upon the president.

The incident, which occurred on the afternoon of September 24 and was first reported by the Santa Barbara Independent, has reignited a debate over free speech on public overpasses — a fight that in California dates back more than two decades.

What Happened on the Overpass

According to the Independent's account, CHP Officer Ayala ordered the signs taken down, telling protesters, "You can't wish death upon the president." The officers reportedly claimed the poster violated the law — "There are certain signs you can't post," one officer can be heard saying in a video recording made by one of the demonstrators — and said they were reporting the Indivisible members to the FBI.

The number "8647" became a national flashpoint after former FBI Director James Comey posted a photo of seashells arranged in the figure on a beach; critics of President Donald Trump have since adopted it as shorthand — "86" meaning to eject, "47" referencing Trump as the 47th president. Supporters of the president have characterized it as a threat; civil liberties advocates disagree.

As the officers left the scene, a supervising CHP sergeant identified in the report as Sergeant Olsen told the protesters they could continue displaying the American flag and other signs — including "Protect our vote" and "Register to vote" — with the exception of the "8647" sign.

Indivisible Santa Barbara, in a statement published by the Independent, called the officers' conduct "chilling" and said the attempted intimidation "failed."

The Legal Landscape

The protesters' position is backed by considerable legal authority. A federal lawsuit cited in the Independent's report — Accountability NOW USA v. Griess, filed in U.S. District Court — found that the "8647" message is protected free speech under the First Amendment. And U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, according to New York Times coverage cited by the Independent, has acknowledged that members of the public may display "8647" signs without fear of prosecution, noting that the phrase is "posted constantly — that phrase is used constantly."

The right to hold signs on highway overpasses specifically is also settled in California. In Brown v. California Department of Transportation, a 2003 federal district court ruling, the court held that government restrictions on signage displayed on highway overpasses must be viewpoint neutral — meaning the state cannot single out a message because officials dislike its politics.

Legal observers note that a threat, to be outside First Amendment protection, must be intended and understood as a serious expression of intent to commit violence. A numerically coded political slogan on a protest sign does not meet that bar, which is why courts and, evidently, the Department of Justice itself have declined to treat "8647" displays as criminal.

A Year of Overpass Protests

For Indivisible Santa Barbara, the confrontation was jarring largely because of how routine their presence there has become. The group has held weekly protests on the Micheltorena overpass — and the neighboring La Cumbre Road overpass — for more than a year, in full view of local, county, and CHP personnel, according to the organization. The group describes itself as part of the nationwide Indivisible movement, committed to nonviolence, with a mission to elect progressive leaders and rebuild democratic institutions.

Despite the episode, the protests will continue. Indivisible Santa Barbara has invited the public to join demonstrators on the Micheltorena and La Cumbre overpasses every Thursday afternoon and early evening.

The group is also calling for accountability, arguing the officers involved "desperately need training on citizens' rights" and that the Highway Patrol's job is traffic enforcement and public safety, "not thought policing." The CHP has not publicly commented on the encounter, and it remains unclear whether any FBI referral was actually made or acted upon.

Why It Matters Locally

For Santa Barbara residents, the episode is a reminder that First Amendment disputes aren't confined to Washington courtrooms — they unfold on the overpasses commuters drive under every day. Overpass protests have become a fixture of local political life, spanning causes from anti-war demonstrations to pandemic-era rallies, and the 2003 Brown decision grew out of exactly this kind of California activism.

The episode also comes amid heightened national sensitivity around political symbols. Federal prosecutions stemming from the "8647" controversy have drawn criticism across the political spectrum, and Blanche's own public comments suggest even the Justice Department has concluded the displays are not prosecutable.

Indivisible Santa Barbara's response, per the Independent, was defiant: "We still have courts and the Constitution. The '8647' signs will still be displayed."

Whether the CHP adjusts its approach — or faces formal legal action — remains to be seen. What is clear is that the Thursday protesters on Micheltorena aren't going anywhere, and the next time a Highway Patrol cruiser slows near the overpass, both sides will be on firmer — if warier — footing.

Information for this story was drawn from reporting by the Santa Barbara Independent, which published the original account on September 26, 2026.