By Gregg Dudash | Fountain Hills
Let’s begin with the basics: the reporter still has a seat in the room. The stories still get printed. Democracy has not collapsed. The First Amendment is intact, though apparently bruised by the loss of a side table.
I’ve read the outcry — the legal theorizing, the claims of retaliation, the social media sermons about fascism and Section 1983. It’s passionate, no doubt. But it’s also nonsense. You don’t need a law degree to understand this isn’t a constitutional crisis. You just need common sense (and perhaps a brief tour through actual First Amendment law).
The press has no divine right to real estate in council chambers. That table wasn’t a constitutional guarantee, it was a courtesy. A freebie. And now it’s gone. Why? Because the people who extended the courtesy felt it was being abused. That’s not censorship. That’s the consequence of lost trust.
And yet, we’re told this is retribution, repression, even grounds for a lawsuit. Really? If removing a table is the line between liberty and tyranny, our republic is in worse shape than I thought.
This isn’t a question of whether journalism is vital (it is), or whether critique of public officials is healthy (it absolutely is). This is about perspective. Removing a table isn’t silencing the press — it’s reminding them that privilege and entitlement aren’t the same thing.
Councilmember Kalivianakis believes the town owes the paper an apology. For what — not subsidizing their office furniture? Should we also provide an espresso machine, a footrest, and perhaps a snack bar? A nice cushy pillow might be just the thing to prevent any pesky lawsuits. You get the idea.
The council acted within its rights. The press is still free. And if your constitutional alarm bells are ringing over some furniture, maybe it’s time to recalibrate your outrage.
Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.
