Council President Nish Patel To Ban American Flag From Council Meetings
Edison, NJ – A proposed ordinance in Edison has sparked controversy by aiming to restrict the use of “props” during public comment at Township Council meetings. The ordinance, put forward by Council President Nish Patel, specifically lists “the use of props while addressing the Council” as an activity that could be considered disruptive.
While the ordinance doesn’t explicitly mention the American Flag or the US Constitution, Council President Nish Patel directly answered the question regarding the American Flag and US Constitution by stating “any props will be considered not conducive to good order and as the President I am Making that call.”
The ordinance, O.2239-2024, seeks to “establish firm rules of decorum for conduct at Township Council meetings. It grants the Council President or presiding officer the authority to maintain order and decorum, including warning and removing individuals who engage in disruptive behavior.
Among the activities listed as potentially disruptive are:
- The use of loud, threatening, or abusive language
- Speaking without being recognized by the Chair
- Wearing costumes or non-medically necessary masks
- The use of props
- Comments or behavior intended to cause disruption
Councilman Patel’s proposal comes in the wake of several contentious council meetings where residents have expressed strong opinions on various issues. Patel’s inability to effectively run a meeting has been a point of contention with many residents this year. Many feel the changes are unneeded sighting the respectful discourse during recent meetings when run by the Council Vice President Margot Harris.
The inclusion of “props” as a potentially disruptive element has drawn particular attention. Especially after the Council President Nish Patel clearly stated his intention to ban the American Flag and US Constitution. “The American flag is a symbol of our nation and our values,” said resident Joel Bassoff. “To suggest that displaying it is disruptive is an insult to everything it stands for.”
During the debate, Council Vice President Margot Harris raised a crucial question that cut to the heart of the issue: “How are props as an expression not part of the 1st Amendment?” This pointed inquiry highlighted the potential conflict between the proposed ordinance and the constitutional right to freedom of speech. Harris’s question challenged the council to consider whether restricting the use of props infringed upon the expressive nature of public demonstrations, suggesting that such limitations might unduly suppress free speech.
Edison Republican Chairwoman Sylvia Engle expressed strong opposition to the ordinance, arguing that banning the flag from council meetings “goes beyond normal political discourse between parties and will be destructive to our diverse community. This goes beyond common sense, quite frankly it’s absurd.” She characterized the proposal as exceeding the bounds of reasonable political disagreement and stifling the first amendment, suggesting it would create deeper divisions within the community.
The proposed ordinance is expected to be discussed and voted on at an upcoming council meeting. If passed, it will take effect 20 days after adoption and approval by the Mayor. The debate surrounding this ordinance highlights the ongoing tension between maintaining order in public forums and protecting individual rights to freedom of expression.
