• Home
• Opinion
• Press Editorials

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

A proposed ordinance in Mullica Township says any people or group wanting to gather on public property must pay for a permit, which they must apply for 30 days prior to the gathering, and must provide proof of liability insurance 10 days prior to the gathering. The permit can be denied or revoked "at the discretion of the township."

We'd say there was a bit of conflict here between the First Amendment and this proposed ordinance. Such burdensome restrictions on free speech and the right to assemble are not likely to survive a legal challenge. The ordinance even specifically includes any "meeting" in its definition of applicable "special events" requiring a permit.

Unfortunately, although the ordinance was temporarily scrapped last week, two committee members plan to reintroduce it.

This issue comes up regularly. Towns faced with the prospect of a march or rally by some group they find abhorrent (or just annoying) quickly draw up a new law requiring expensive permits, proof of insurance and various other impediments to the gathering. Such laws have to be crafted very carefully to survive a court challenge. Most aren't - and most don't.

Mullica's ordinance, as originally proposed, does not come close, in our opinion. And according to one Democratic committeeman, it's all an attempt to curtail a long tradition in Mullica - political campaigning at the town dump.

Supporters, including Mayor Janet Forman, say that's not true - that the ordinance was prepared at the request of the Joint Insurance Fund that covers the city.

"I don't want to step on anyone's civil liberties," Forman said. "But if a thousand people want to stand in front of the dump for a vigil, we need something in place to make sure the township is protected if someone gets hurt."

But whatever the intent, any ordinance that requires 30 days of notice and proof of insurance for a political "meeting" on public property just isn't going to fly.

We suspect some miscommunication here. Certainly, the JIF can't require the township to do something that's clearly unconstitutional.

The township solicitor suggested an amendment to specify that a "special event" under the ordinance would "specifically exclude any public assembly or other gathering for the purpose of political discourse, debate or other similar expressive activity."

That would help, of course.

But Mullica is going down a tortuous path here for unclear reasons.

At the moment, the ordinance is dead. We suggest its supporters leave it that way.

1 comment:

• JerseyDevil (392) posts 3:01 am

  This is the reason nobody pays any attention to the PINEYS!!! They can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

PressofAtlanticCity.com offers everyone the opportunity to comment on published stories. However, it is impractical for editors to screen all comments.
If you believe a comment is offensive, please click on the abuse-reporting link and your objection will be considered by an editor. We encourage participants to use their real names, but inoffensive screen names are acceptable. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them.
Please post responsibly. Do not post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy.
Be polite. Don’t hate. Users who don’t play by the rules may be blocked from participating.

View our full terms of service and privacy agreement

Click here to report a comment as abusive.

You must login to post a new comment