Wisconsin's Capitol Police signed my permit in 48 hours. Ten other states said no. Florida named me in a statute to stop me. AMA before I install June 12.

I'm Chaz Stevens (proof). I file paperwork. I follow every rule. Governments get two choices: approve, which proves the public forum is neutral, or deny, which proves it isn't. Either way, I get a document. The document is the art.

Receipts:

• Permit 2026P216 (proof). Wisconsin State Capitol Police. Signed by Chief David M. Erwin, April 3, 2026. Filed April 1. Standard processing: 10 business days. Actual: 48 hours. Install: June 12, First Floor Rotunda.
• Story just went live on the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
• Ten denials on the same application. Three Florida cities, the State of Florida (four times), Georgia, Oklahoma, Illinois, Washington, Iowa. Ohio approved in 2025.
• Florida Statute 1006.28 (HB 1467). In 2023, the Legislature amended its own book-ban law to stop me from using it. I had filed a Bible challenge in 63 Florida school districts under the law as written. The legislative record names me as the reason.

What I install: A six-foot brushed-aluminum decorative pole. Permitted. Insured.

What the application did not describe: The topper. A 15-inch LED neon heart reading "Don + Jeff." Or the custom can artwork. Under Capitol Square Review & Advisory Board v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753 (1995), no disclosure-of-viewpoint requirement applies in a public forum. I checked. Twice.

"Chaz is the General Patton of the War on Christmas." — Jon Stewart

Chief Erwin has my number. I have his signature.

Ask me anything.

UPDATE: Surfacing a comment:

Government property — the lawn of a state capitol, the rotunda inside it, the plaza out front — is sometimes opened up for the public to put displays on. Christmas trees. Nativity scenes. Menorahs. Veterans memorials. When the government opens that space to one group, the First Amendment says it has to open it to everyone, on the same terms. They cannot pick and choose based on which message they like.

All or none, as I like to say.

The catch: most governments quietly pick and choose anyway. They approve the nativity scene in two days and "lose" the Satanology application for six months. They tell the church group "sure, here's the permit" and tell me "we need more information" forty-seven times in a row.

My job is to make that illegal behavior visible.

I apply for a permit to install a piece of satirical art. I fill out every form correctly. I get the insurance. I follow every rule they wrote. Then I wait.

I use the law to break the law.

If they approve it, I install the art. People see it. The point is made: this space is actually open to everyone, including the weirdos.

If they deny it, they have to put the denial in writing. That written denial, compared against the approvals they gave the church group last month, becomes evidence in a lawsuit. The paperwork is the trap. They either follow their own rules and let me in, or they break their own rules and hand me the case.

Wisconsin followed the rules. Permit approved in 48 hours. Pole goes up June 12.

Florida did not. 9 other locations did not. They wrote a statute naming me personally to keep me out. That statute is now its own lawsuit.

The pole is silly on purpose. That is the whole point. If a government will bend its own laws to keep something silly out of a public square, imagine what it will do to keep something serious out.

The paperwork makes the difference because the paperwork is the receipt. Without it, the government can claim it treats everyone equally. With it, the record shows otherwise.