Meriden Free Speech Issue Resolved

Responding to objections from the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, the Meriden City Council has changed a proposed rule on comments from members of the public at its meetings.

The council discussed prohibiting speakers from "using offensive or abusive language and personally attacking any public officials." In a letter dated Jan. 31, 2014, ACLU of Connecticut Legal Director Sandra Staub and cooperating attorney Martin Margulies told council members that such a ban would be "“blatantly unconstitutional.”

“It is bedrock law that ‘attacks on government and public officials’ are protected even when ‘vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp,’” they wrote, citing several U.S. Supreme Court cases. The council could adopt viewpoint-neutral regulations, such as a ban on vulgarity or profanity, without violating speakers' First Amendment right to freedom of speech, the letter said.

On February 17, 2014, the council adopted a new rule that prohibits "vulgar, obscene or indecent" language in public comments, according to the Meriden Record Journal. The new rule also lifts a restriction on the topics the public may address. Discussion had been limited to issues on the meeting agenda but is now open to any topic.

"This is a better policy and we commend the Meriden City Council for its efforts to expand opportunities for public comment," Staub said. "We would like to think it will be applied as carefully and narrowly as possible in order to provide the greatest possible protection of the public's free speech rights."

The ACLU of Connecticut has sent similar letters to the Waterbury Board of Aldermen, which imposed and then rescinded a ban on "ad hominem, personal, malicious, slanderous or libelous remarks” in December 2013, and the Winchester Board of Selectmen, which abandoned its prohibition on “personal complaints or defamatory comments” in August 2013.