A recent move by the Edison Municipal Council in New Jersey to ban the American flag and the U.S. Constitution from being used in council meetings has sparked an intense backlash from the community. What was meant to be an ordinance aimed at maintaining order during public meetings has turned into a major point of controversy, with locals protesting and raising concerns about free speech and constitutional rights. The ban on what the council has deemed “props” at meetings has become a hot topic of debate, leaving many to wonder whether the council is overstepping its boundaries.
A Controversial Ordinance: The “Prop” Ban
The Edison Township Council introduced this ordinance to establish “firm rules of decorum for conduct” after several public meetings had devolved into chaos. In recent sessions, the atmosphere became increasingly heated and disruptive, leading to a decision to implement stricter guidelines for public participation. Among these new rules is the prohibition of "the use of props while addressing the Council.” This provision has come under fire because it specifically includes the American flag and the U.S. Constitution as items that are banned under the new rules.
The council also imposed other restrictions, such as limiting public addresses to four minutes, banning the wearing of costumes, and prohibiting non-medically necessary masks. The move followed some particularly wild scenes in the meetings, including one incident in which a man appeared dressed as a bong, and others wore masks, including the infamous Anonymous and Mexican wrestler masks. This kind of theatrical protest was sparked by Council President Nishith Patel’s earlier decision to ban unnecessary face coverings during public speaking.
The Flag Incident: A Turning Point
The controversy reached a boiling point during a November 25 meeting when local lawyer Joel Bassoff defied the ban and raised an American flag as a symbol of the constitutional values he believed should guide the council. His bold move was met with resistance from Council President Patel, who immediately warned Bassoff that he would lose his speaking time if he continued to violate the newly instated prop ban.
Bassoff, undeterred by the warning, responded with a passionate defense of his actions, saying, “It is my constitutional right to do so, and if you get sued, you will lose.” The scene quickly escalated as two police officers approached the lawyer, prompting Patel to call for his removal from the meeting. A tense exchange followed, with Bassoff asserting that the council had forfeited its right to preside over the meeting through their actions. “Your time should be forfeited, your positions should be forfeited,” he declared, adding that the council had no right to restrict free speech in such a manner.
The heated confrontation was captured on video and quickly went viral on social media, sparking widespread debate. The incident was shared across platforms, including X (formerly known as Twitter), where the New Jersey GOP posted a clip of the exchange with the message, "Democrats in Edison, NJ, have banned the American flag, the U.S. Constitution, and other ‘props’ from their Council meetings. The next meeting is December 11 at 7:00 p.m. We hope to see you there." This post, along with the viral footage, further amplified the outrage surrounding the council’s decision.
Public Outrage: “Disgusting” and “Insulting”
During the same meeting, several local residents took to the podium to voice their opposition to the ban. Maryann Hennessey, one of the speakers, expressed her dismay, saying, “To consider the American flag and the Constitution a prop when someone raises it is an insult to what the flag is, what the flag stands for, and what this country is.” Her comments resonated with many who saw the council’s decision as not only an affront to their rights but also an insult to the nation’s history and values.
Sue Malone-Barber, another resident who spoke out, took issue with the council’s broader attempt to control the atmosphere of public meetings. She criticized the ordinance for trying to stifle public expression and referred to the recent council meetings as “a three-ring circus” due to their chaotic nature. However, Malone-Barber argued that attempting to limit the public’s ability to speak freely in such an authoritarian manner was “ludicrous, rude, and juvenile.” She continued, “Residents won’t forget how they were made to feel and how things were handled.”
Her sentiments were echoed by others in the room who were frustrated by the council’s efforts to control what they saw as a natural outlet for public dissatisfaction. “Flags—really a prop? Are you going to throw me out?” Malone-Barber questioned, before adding, “It’s juvenile to fight this war. You’re losing. It’s just making people more agitated and more determined to provoke getting thrown out. Let it go. It’s a waste of taxpayer time.”
This argument highlights a growing tension between local government officials who feel the need to maintain order in meetings and residents who are determined to uphold their right to express their views, especially on matters as important as the American flag and the Constitution.
The Bigger Picture: A National Debate
The controversy over the ban has sparked a larger conversation about the balance between maintaining order in public meetings and protecting the constitutional rights of citizens. As the American flag and the Constitution are symbols of the nation’s founding ideals, many feel that banning them from council meetings sends a troubling message about what values are truly respected by local government officials.
In response to the council’s actions, many people are calling for a reevaluation of the ordinance, which they argue could have far-reaching consequences. The move has drawn attention to the broader issue of free speech in local governance and whether the attempt to curtail public expression in meetings could lead to an erosion of individual rights. As this issue unfolds, it serves as a reminder that the fight for free speech is far from over.
In addition to the outcry over the specific props being banned, the ordinance also outlines other potentially disruptive behaviors that are prohibited at council meetings. These include the use of loud, threatening, or abusive language and speaking without being recognized by the chair. While these rules aim to maintain order, the controversy surrounding the prop ban has raised serious questions about whether such restrictions are necessary or whether they violate the spirit of free expression.
Looking Ahead: The December 11 Meeting
As tensions continue to rise, all eyes will be on the next Edison Township Council meeting, scheduled for December 11. The controversy surrounding the banning of the American flag and the Constitution has galvanized many residents, and it is likely that the meeting will be packed with people eager to make their voices heard. Whether or not the council will amend the ordinance remains to be seen, but it is clear that this issue has sparked a larger conversation about the limits of government control and the rights of citizens to express their beliefs in public forums.
As the debate rages on, one thing is certain: the people of Edison are not backing down. Whether or not they agree with the council’s policies, they are determined to stand up for their rights and ensure that their voices are heard. In a time when free speech is under constant scrutiny, the fight for the right to speak out remains as crucial as ever.
Login