Letters: Residents should be allowed to air their views to council

My first interaction with what happened on Tuesday, Aug. 20 at the Surprise City Council meeting was a friend messaging me a video and telling me, “I can’t believe what I am seeing.”

When I watched it I could not either. Every person in the United States, regardless of their political beliefs, has the right to peacefully speak their mind in when able to, “petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This is the first amendment to our Constitution, it’s very words are an embodiment of the ideals that make up the bedrock of our nation.

I don’t agree with every political opinion Rebekah Massie holds. In fact, we would probably disagree more than agree on some issues about government roll in society.

I fought for this country, I served four years in the United States Marine Corps, so we have the freedom to go up to a city council and, if a person so choses, give them choice words about how they are doing.

However, regardless of those beliefs Mrs. Massie deserves to be able to be unhindered in her comments to her city council. The idea, by some such as another public commenter John A. Yaeger, that she was hysterical, is disgusting and repulsive as a response to the blatant disregard for being accountable to one’s constituency. Frankly, supporting such actions is unbecoming as a person.

They charged her, after she stood up to speech and was forced off stage, with trespassing, resisting arrest, and obstruction of government work. I am starting to agree that the city attorney is paid too much if he can’t take these officers to the back room and explain to them in simple language how dumb they are acting, as well as explaining to Mayor Skip Hall the same.

If Mrs. Massie was refusing to leave after her allotted time, then a trespassing charge would stick. However, it was clear retaliation for the content of her speech.

This violates Texas v. Johnson in 1989, where the Supreme Court made it quite clear that a government cannot restrict speech simply because of the content of that speech. The state (in this case Hall) cannot censor nor retaliate against Mrs. Massie for her speech, regardless of the content of it. If Mrs. Massie wishes to take the stand and spend her minutes swearing, she is entitled to.

As for the addition of resisting arrest, it’s just another example of zealous overcharging. Did Mrs. Massie want to finish her constitutionally protected speech? Yes, she did. But resisting an unconstitutional and illegal arrest is legal in Arizona, and as we previously established, the initial trespassing charges and arrest are illegal.

The obstruction of government work is laughable as it’s the city council’s job at this meeting to hear from its citizens. If anyone should be arrested for obstruction of government work, it should be Mayor Hall.

In conclusion, Mayor Hall should resign, and never be run as a candidate for trash man, let alone mayor.

Yaeger should stop bootlicking tyrannical and unconstitutional actives. And maybe we shouldn’t pay a city attorney for the 10th largest city more than the next nine. But then again Mayor Hall would know that if he listens to his constituents.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.