• fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    There are definitely states where it’s required. Washington is one, for example. I was too lazy to research more.

    But anyway, the details matter. One can easily have public comment but still limit the undesirable speech, as this specific example shows… Is that legal? Depends if you have a good lawyer.

    • Hinterwalder@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      I have experience in this. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on it. If it’s open comment time, they cannot censor except for obscene or threatening speech. All they can do is set a time limit. Don’t cuss or make violent threats and you’re good. If they censor you it’s an open and shut civil rights case.

      If it’s a public hearing for a specific matter, they can restrict comment to that topic.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Seems like an opportunity for malicious compliance …. Perhaps everyone can speak up against stifling public input “on matters like F*ck cameras”