Political Window Signs- A 1st Amendment Victory!

In a landmark decision last summer the NJ Supreme Court ruled that a condo or building restriction on political window signs violated the US Constitution’s 1st Amendment as well as NJ law. The right for free speech is one of our most treasured rights. The condo complex where I now live has such a restriction (among others) and I have personally delivered them the court case Mazdabrook vs. Kahn decision.

So whether you reside in condo like the Skyline, a large rental like Archstone or in the uptown Shipyard area you can now put up a sign for the candidate(s) of your choice. Your building’s restriction is now null and void.

Wasim  Kahn was running for the Parsippany town council and placed one of his signs on his door and another one on his window. Doing so violated the rules of his complex. He was fined $25 for violating the complexes policy and removed them.

Rather than taking it, he chose to hire my Hoboken friend, attorney  Dana Wefer.. As stated above the case made it all the way to NJ Supreme Court where Chief Justice Steven Ratner in ruling for the majority stated “Political speech in support of one's candidacy for public office is fundamental to a democratic society".

It is protected by the State Constitution, which affirmatively guarantees the right of free speech to all citizens. Balancing the minimal interference with Mazdabrook's private property interest against Khan's free speech right to post political signs on his own property, we conclude that the sign policy in question violates the free speech clause of the State Constitution. We therefore affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division.”

New Jersey's Constitution guarantees individuals a broad, affirmative right to free speech. Under the Constitution, "[e]very person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press." N.J. Const. art. I, ¶ 6”.

Mazdabrook argued that as a private residential community they did not violate free speech rights. The ACLU represented by the Constitutional Litigation Clinic of Rutgers Law School, argued that the Association's sign regulations unconstitutionally restrict free speech. A restriction banning an entire category of political speech, the ACLU contends, is unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional.

The High Court agreed with that belief.

If you are like me and believe that political signs are everyone’s right to display then I urge to do what I have done and contact your building manager and inform them that no window clause is now invalid when it comes to political signs. You can use the link below:

http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20NJCO%2020120613375

If you have any problems I urge you contact Dana Wefer. Ms. Wefer is a graduate of Rutgers University of Newark having graduated in 2004 where she majored in Philosophy and Political science. She subsequently graduated from Rutgers University School of Law, Newark, NJ in 2007.

She can be contacted by phone:

973-610-0491

 Or by email:

DanaWefer@Gmail.com