Spotsylvania County School Board Chair Marxist Megan Jackson responded to our inquiry about banning Shamgar Connors from speaking at school board meetings. Here is our response to Megan Jackson’s response in the screenshot below.
Here are some of Shamgar Connor’s previous speeches at Spotsylvania County School Board meetings
Megan,
Thank you for writing to the Spotsy Wire. The limits of free speech are restricted to the categories of defamation, threats of violence, obscenity, or lawless action. We listened to your speech. We also listened to all of Shamgar Connors speeches. Shamgar Connors did not come close to entering into any of those forbidden categories.
The speech you made to justify banning the free speech of Shamgar Connors was focused on your feelings. That is subjective. One person can take offense to something that another person won’t take offense to. It’s the speech that one subjectively interprets as most offensive that the first amendment is designed to protect.
We remember your speech from the 2022 school board meeting where you criticized Chairman Twigg about free speech rights. You were loud and disruptive and offended many. If you are the champion of free speech, you certainly could not be offended by Connors speech because your behavior was worse.
We are concerned that you infringed on free speech by using subjective personal standards outside of the forbidden speech categories previously listed. We are further concerned that you illegally used the color of law to throw Shamgar Connors out of school board meetings and to enforce a no trespass order. You can not criminalize first amendment protected activity. When you stated the following comments in your speech, you are clearly using these feelings as a pretext to restrict Connors speech
“this speaker continues to push the boundaries with his comments”
“i was shocked by his speech”
We understand that you do not agree with the content of Connor’s speech and that manner in which he expresses that content. However, you escalated things by engaging in viewpoint discrimination when you made the statements below
“if you come to the podium and make a mockery of very serious harm violence and crimes against children as if you are making a joke about it, I will ask you leave this room immediately
“You are more than welcome to address these very serious concerns with us as several people have no issues because they were able to do it without making light of it.”
Shamgar Connors was not making a mockery of child abuse victims. He was using satire to make a mockery of the actions or inactions of the school board and school administration. Let us suppose that Shamgar Connors was making a mockery of child abuse. It still does not justify removing him or trespassing him because Shamgar’s speech did not contain threats, lawless action, or defamation.
The courts have ruled in favor of first amendment protections of public speakers.
Isaiah
