3 ms·

This is untrue in the us. You need to be a certified PE to sign certain documents and if you misrepresent yourself in that situation, you might be criminally li

This is untrue in the us. You need to be a certified PE to sign certain documents and if you misrepresent yourself in that situation, you might be criminally liable, and certainly financially so, but no anyone can call themselves a PE or an engineer thanks to the first amendment (for recent relevant caselaw: https://ij.org/press-release/oregon-engineer-wins-traffic-light-timing-lawsuit/ https://ij.org/press-release/oregon-engineer-wins-traffic-li...).

glitchc 4y ago
You are incorrect. The judge's ruling is exceedingly narrow and does not qualify Mats to call himself an engineer in any area other than publicly commenting on traffic light timing. Mats cannot call himself an engineer for the purposes of any other subject, including electrical enginnering, for which he is trained, until he acquires the PE designation. https://www.nspe.org/resources/issues-and-advocacy/latest-news/federal-court-ruling-preserves-professional-engineer https://www.nspe.org/resources/issues-and-advocacy/latest-ne...
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  This is incorrect. He cannot call himself a PE for the purposes of acquiring clients (that's fraud), but he's perfectly free to call himself an engineer otherwise, per the actual ruling and not a press release by a biased party. You are correct that the ruling partially constrains itself to traffic lights, but that is because that's all Jarlstrom asked for, and this was a preliminary injunction, it didn't even go to trial! That said, the ruling also makes clear that the Oregon engineering title laws (as opposed to engineering practice laws) "violate the first amendment on their face". And if those statutes are unconstitutional, there's no law for Jarlstrom to violate. And as such, it states " Plaintiff Järlström may describe himself publicly and privately using the word “engineer." And that Oregon cannot enforce any of the professional engineering registration act against him for doing so. And Oregon is one of only a few states with such a law, so in most of the US there isn't even a law to strike down, it's just clearly legal.

glitchc 4y ago

You are incorrect. The judge's ruling is exceedingly narrow and does not qualify Mats to call himself an engineer in any area other than publicly commenting on traffic light timing. Mats cannot call himself an engineer for the purposes of any other subject, including electrical enginnering, for which he is trained, until he acquires the PE designation. https://www.nspe.org/resources/issues-and-advocacy/latest-news/federal-court-ruling-preserves-professional-engineer https://www.nspe.org/resources/issues-and-advocacy/latest-ne...

joshuamorton 4y ago
This is incorrect. He cannot call himself a PE for the purposes of acquiring clients (that's fraud), but he's perfectly free to call himself an engineer otherwise, per the actual ruling and not a press release by a biased party. You are correct that the ruling partially constrains itself to traffic lights, but that is because that's all Jarlstrom asked for, and this was a preliminary injunction, it didn't even go to trial! That said, the ruling also makes clear that the Oregon engineering title laws (as opposed to engineering practice laws) "violate the first amendment on their face". And if those statutes are unconstitutional, there's no law for Jarlstrom to violate. And as such, it states " Plaintiff Järlström may describe himself publicly and privately using the word “engineer." And that Oregon cannot enforce any of the professional engineering registration act against him for doing so. And Oregon is one of only a few states with such a law, so in most of the US there isn't even a law to strike down, it's just clearly legal.