HAMLET — An organization that has been defending the First Amendment for more than two decades is suggesting that another local governmental body revise its public comment policy.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression recently reviewed the policy of the Richmond County Board of Education and found several provisions that could violate the free speech rights of speakers.
“While these rules may be intended to maintain order and decorum, the board can achieve that goal through far narrower measures that focus on actual disruption of its meetings,” said Aaron Terr, FIRE’s director of public advocacy, after analyzing the policy. “Sharp criticism is not per se disruptive.”
According to the BOE’s website, the policy was last revised in 2010 and includes several restrictions including remarks that are “ obscene, derogatory, or slanderous” and permits the chairperson to “terminate any comments which violate these rules or are otherwise considered to be inappropriate.”
“The bans on ‘derogatory' and ‘inappropriate’ comments violate a cardinal First Amendment principle: government officials cannot suppress speech simply because they don’t like its tone or viewpoint,” said Terr. “These terms are also unconstitutionally vague because they don’t give speakers fair warning about what speech is allowed.
“It’s anybody’s guess when a board member will deem a comment ‘inappropriate,’” Terr continued. “In practice, officials often use these types of open-ended rules to silence criticism and viewpoints they disagree with.”
Terr said the board should also eliminate the ban on “slanderous” comments.
Aaron Terr, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
“While actual slander is outside the First Amendment’s protection, whether a comment is slanderous or defamatory is a complex legal judgment to be made in court, with the attendant procedural safeguards,” said Terr. “A school board can’t decide, on the spot, that speech is 'slanderous' in a legal sense. That opens the door to board members censoring whatever criticism they think is false or unfair, even if it’s protected.
Another concern pointed out by Terr is the requirement that speakers state their address at the beginning of their comments. The school board isn’t alone in this aspect, with several other boards — including the Ellerbe Town Council, Rockingham City Council and Richmond County Board of Commissioners — ask speakers to give their address.
“Not only does the rule compel speech, but it does so in a way that can chill participation in board meetings by exposing speakers to retaliation,” Terr said, pointing to a recent decision by a board in a nearby county. “The City of Monroe, North Carolina, recently rescinded a similar requirement as part of a legal settlement after speakers at city council meetings alleged harassment tied to the public disclosure of their home addresses.”
The school board’s policy also demands that comments be made to the board and not individual board members. Terr said that provision is “on shaky ground.”
“Several courts have struck down similar bans on ‘personally directed’ comments as vague or overly broad,” Terr said. “In practice, they’re often used to shut down criticism of specific government officials.”
Several topics are off the table for discussion, including:
“The constitutionality of restrictions on discussing certain subjects is more nuanced,” said Terr. “School boards generally have some authority to limit public comment to certain subjects, but those restrictions must be viewpoint-neutral and reasonable in light of the purpose of public comment, which is to give the public an opportunity to speak about district-related issues with their elected representatives.
“The reasonableness of some of these restrictions is highly questionable. While the board itself might be prohibited by law from speaking about some of these subjects in an open meeting, that doesn’t necessarily justify banning members of the public from doing so.”
Earlier this year, FIRE provided an analysis of the Rules of Decorum passed by the Hamlet City Council; and in 2024 reviewed the public appearance policy passed by the Richmond County Board of Commissioners.
