September 16, 2012

Our View: Towns should not limit free speech in political signs

The ACLU is right to warn towns about the danger of over-managing campaign material.

Everyone has a gripe about political signs. There are too many of them, they distract drivers, they are ugly.

They are also an example of free speech, and not just any free speech but political speech, which is exactly the kind of speech the founders tried to protect when they wrote the First Amendment. State law puts limits on when and where the signs with candidates' names can be posted. They have to come down right after Election Day, and a candidate cannot post a sign on someone else's private property.

But towns that want to go farther should be ready to face a challenge in court, as the town of Alfred learned in a letter last week from the ACLU of Maine.

Like democracy itself, political signs can be annoying and inconvenient, but that's the price we pay for self government.

 

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors




Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)


Most…