Freedom's just another word...

So a Mississippi Judge who obviously--like a few too many judges--thinks of himself as God, threw an attorney in jail for failure to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Although the attorney did respectfully stand while the courtroom came to attention.

In the 1995 Hurley decision the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the First Amendment also prevents an individual or group from saying something they do not wish to say. In this case a private parade committee; thus, as a private organization, the judges upheld the notion that they can select which messages are expressed to onlookers and which messages are not.

The town of Amherst already ran afoul of this clear-as-day decision when they tried to deny the privately run Amherst July 4 Parade Committee a permit due to restrictions on the signs that marching groups could carry. You know, the very same rules the town used when it organized a 350th Anniversary Parade.

The ACLU instantly set the People's Republic strait, and the Parade continues in the traditional old fashioned way.

The greatest freedom our flag represents is the right to burn it.

But I do indeed cringe when unbalanced individuals or groups push the envelope, such as a pastor threatening to burn the Koran on 9/11, or the KKK wanting to publicly dress up in their sheets or neo-nazis to march through Skokie, a heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago.

The Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments about whether a whacko religious group that should be ignored has the right to hold homophobic signs while picketing outside the funerals of American soldiers who died for their country in far off Iraq or Afghanistan. Icky. Icky. Icky!

But, that is the price we pay for our freedom. I remember once seeing my wife and another dear old friend wearing burkas, and it was not a pretty sight.

Fuck the ACLU

What do I love most about the American Civil Liberties Union?

If local, state or federal authorities squelched my blog now over that provocative headline, and I called Bill Newman, Western Mass ACLU Director, he would instantly do everything in his considerable power to fend off the government intrusion on my First Amendment rights, all without sending me a bill.

Just as the national chapter did in the 1971 Supreme Court case of Cohan V California.

I first met Mr. Newman back in November, 1999 when I invited him to speak at a public rally on the Town Common I organized to protest the cancellation of 'West Side Story'. To date, the People's Republic of Amherst is the only entity in history to nix the award winning play.

And in his brief presentation he said, "The way to deal with bad speech is with good speech and more of it--not censorship." Although I'm sure he did not for a moment believe 'West Side Story' actually constituted "bad speech."

So yes, I despise Cowardly Anonymous Nitwits who march under white sheets, or an organization that advocates for sex between men and boys, or protesters who picket the funeral of American military personnel with homophobic signage--but that is the price we pay for our most cherished American ideal, the Freedom of Speech. A small price indeed.

So thank God (yes, another freedom I have) for the ACLU these past 90 years!


The Springfield Republican reports

First Amendment blog assault continues...

So School Committee Chair Michael DeChiara has not seen his name in print for a few weeks and conveniently decided to continue stoking the fires of censorship by sending a follow-up missive (this time only signed by His Majesty and not the other 4 School Committee Chairs) to the District Attorney attempting to rebut the rightfully concerned ACLU counter-letter that garnered equal headlines to his initial PR ploy.

Okay, fair enough. But one thing you probably should not do in a letter to the DA, who is after all an attorney, is to admit you are "not a lawyer and cannot offer case citations," but then go on to suggest the ACLU lawyers who are lawyers--and well respected ones at that--did "not read the 5/18/10 letter carefully."

DeChiara whines, "Because many of us perceive the possibility of a conflict between Freedom of Expression and Massachusetts' Open Meeting Law it is my/our public belief that many of us are that many public officials are self censoring; limiting their freedom of expression as a result of murky legal waters."

Oh really? So who are all these public officials holding back their desire to found a free blog on Blogger or Wordpress because they fear violation of state law? Can you name one or two? And last I looked the state of Massachusetts has one of the weakest Open Meeting Laws in the nation--as individuals do not get fined for (intentional) violations, so they certainly don't have to worry about ever going to jail.

So if a current public official is that timid to hold off on founding a blog because state government has not issued "Blogging and Open Meeting Law for Dummies," then chances are their blog would be boring as Hell and nobody would read it anyway.

The state Open Meeting Law, as toothless as it is, was enacted to ensure public discussion takes place in public; it's the intentional, deliberate circumvention that should concern citizens--not the once in a blue moon unintentional serial discussion where one board member bumps into another at the grocery store and comments about an issue before them and then that member bumps into another at the Dunkin Donuts and regurgitates the brief comments.

But on a blog, EVERYBODY can look over your shoulder and bear witness to the conversation--all of it time date stamped!

I'm glad DeChiara professes to "wholeheartedly supports the ideas and values behind government acting 'in the sunshine'. However, without clear guidelines from the District Attorney, this is not possible."

Hmm...the First Amendment is a Federal Law enacted to prevent government--even lowly town government--from restricting the rights of 'The People and The Press' to voice their opinions. Asking a (state) government agent for "clear guidelines" about free expression is kind of like asking the fox to come up with organizational rules for the henhouse.

And yeah, I kid you not, he even signed off with:

"Michael DeChiara
Shutesbury, MA
An elected public official seeking guidance from my government."

(Although to his credit, he did at least forward a copy to the ACLU--but not to School Committee blogger Catherine Sanderson who is the obvious target of his egotistical ire.)

Consonance and Dissonance

So if I were--God forbid--the editor of the esteemed Amherst Bulletin, I would have been a tad more, errr, snarky with my Page One layout.

I loved the main above-the-fold top story placement for "ACLU backs 'official' blogs" as well as the almost equal placement (folks read left to right) of A-Rods rant about his brief tenure as highest paid Superintendent in history. Hey, at least he did not blame the blogosphere this time.

But the just below-the-fold, "Amherst Boycotts Arizona" contiguous with Amherst Regional High School baseball pitching phenom Kevin Ziomek getting drafted by the ARIZONA Diamondbacks where the Bully purposely left Arizona out of the headline "Ziomek drafted by Diamondbacks" is what I'm really talking about.

Oh well, I guess the diffident Amherst Bulletin doesn't want to piss off the Amherst powers that be.

Score (another) one for the blogosphere!

6:15 AM (Tuesday) So the print Gazette put this ACLU spanking of school committee chairs for trying to censor blogs story on the Front Page--but, alas, below the fold. My friend Vladimir Morales hogged the above the fold location with an article about him getting the Select Board to endorse a boycott of Arizona (geeze, like how hard was that to do?) Just another typical 'Only in Amherst' idea, so naturally it attracts undue media attention.
######################################
9:25 PM Gazettenet just put up tomorrow's edition of the Daily Hampshire Gazette and it contains a "guest column" by Michael DeChiara, chairman of the Shutesbury School Committee defending his idea to get the DA to issue a (restrictive) guidebook for public officials daring to use the open transparency and power of the blog.

The ACLU counter-letter railing against that Free Speech chilling idea could not have come at a better time. Let's hear if for the cavalry!
#######################################

1:15 PM (hot copy)

Those White Knights of Freedom, the ACLU, has come to defense of the blogosphere--or at least Amherst School Committee member Catherine Sanderson's piece of it--with a common sense official letter of concern to the local District Attorney who was recently asked by five School Committee chairs to provide a legal opinion potentially shutting down the freewheeling discussion that takes place on blogs if maintained by public officials--that as an Amherst Redevelopment Authority member include me.

They share the tremendous concern of all of us who value the freedom and New World Order brought on by that great equalizer for Democracy, the Internet.

According to the dispatch signed by William Newman, Director ACLU western Massachusetts Law Offices and his legal partner Thomas Newman, "The Supreme Court has been unwavering that expression on public issues rests on the highest rung of the First Amendment values."

They also point out that which should be pretty obvious: "Blogs are completely open to the public for inspection and response. And where there are no secret meetings or deliberations by a quorum, there is no violation of the Open Meeting Law."

Even more to the point: "The goals of the Open Meeting Law, we suggest, are enhanced, not jeopardized, by the use of blogs by public officials, who invite public comment and debate and allow an elected official to state his or her views and to invite criticism and comment, much as elected officials regularly do when newspapers ask for , and then report, comments and positions of elected officials on pending issues."

And they conclude with "We urge the greatest caution in any formulation of the Open Meeting Law that might tend to compromise the guarantee of the First Amendment."

Or to quote Scottish Braveheart William Wallace's dying word (at least as enunciated by Mel Gibson): FREEDOM!

My initial breaking of this story

The Bully Reported (better late than never)