WESTFIELD, N.J.—Last week, officials in Westfield, New Jersey unanimously voted to amend an ordinance that previously gave town leaders unlimited discretion to prohibit signs, posters, or other written materials on public property, which had opened the door to unconstitutional censorship of residents’ free speech. The ordinance was amended following a letter sent by the Institute for Justice (IJ) to officials calling for change.

The old version of the ordinance broadly banned signs and posters on all public property without permission from government officials. But the law didn’t provide any guidelines on when that permission should be given, granting government officials unbridled discretion to license favored speech and to prohibit disfavored speech. As IJ’s letter explained, that kind of discretion to engage in content and viewpoint discrimination violated bedrock First Amendment principles. After receiving IJ’s letter, town officials acknowledged that their ordinance was at odds with the First Amendment’s requirements, and they began the process to revise the sign ordinance.

The revised version makes two important changes. First, it removes the requirement to seek permission to use signs, so that it no longer imposes a prior restraint on speech, something that is anathema to the First Amendment. Second, it replaces the prior version’s unbridled enforcement discretion with more narrowly drawn time, place, and manner restrictions on speech—for instance, creating a uniform, clear rule about number of allowable signs. It also more carefully defines the types of speech that are prohibited, focusing on narrow categories of speech that are not constitutionally protected, such as true threats or incitement to violence. The new ordinance creates clearer standards in line with the First Amendment.

“Public parks are a quintessential forum for speech, and any restrictions on speech there must be carefully drawn with clear standards to prevent discrimination against disfavored content or viewpoints,” said IJ Attorney Ben Field. “Westfield’s old ordinance unconstitutionally gave officials total discretion about what speech to permit or forbid. I’m glad to see that the revised ordinance significantly constrains that discretion to ensure equal treatment of all speech and all speakers.”

Before the amendment, there was evidence that Westfield officials did indeed use their discretion to censor disfavored political speech. IJ was in touch with Westfield resident Shawn Mullen, who in 2021 was running for Town Council. During that campaign, Shawn had a table with small campaign signs and literature in a public park during an event he was co-sponsoring. However, Councilman Michael Dardia, who was running for city council on the opposing party’s ticket, ordered event organizers to take down the signs, and called the police. According to a police report for the incident, officers ordered Shawn and his fellow campaigners to remove their signs and literature. While the town enforced its ordinance against Shawn, it regularly allowed political signs and literature from other speakers on public land.

Under the new ordinance, this kind of viewpoint and content discrimination will no longer be permissible. Instead, residents like Shawn may generally display signs freely in public parks without needing preapproval from officials, subject only to narrowly drawn and uniform exceptions.

“It was very satisfying to see this process come to a successful conclusion, knowing that the types of free speech abuses that occurred during my campaign should be prevented from happening again,” said Shawn. “I greatly appreciate that there are organizations like IJ out there to help protect our constitutional rights.”

IJ has a long history of fighting to protect Americans’ right to free speech through challenging unconstitutional sign code restrictions, including victories in Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, and Washington. IJ has also worked with cities to amend unconstitutional sign laws to avoid litigation.