Editorial: Boundaries

Ms. Mohr quotes Ms. Longrie's reaction to the Copeland Council's role in Maplewood's barely dodged insurance bullet:

"A council member ... expressed their opinion of somebody. Is that OK? I don't know. Is that protected by the First Amendment? I don't know," Longrie said. "But they're saying, 'We won't insure you if you speak your mind.' What speech is allowed? I don't know."

It is difficult to imagine a context from which this quote could be lifted that would explain it away, so the reader is left to take it at face value.

First, Ms. Longrie seems to believe that because a speech act is protected by the First Amendment, it should have no consequences. The insurer makes no claim about Ms. Longrie's or Mr. Hjelle's right to speak. They would have no role in denying or defending that right since the Constitution of the United States of America delimits the role of government, not insurance trusts. They do rightly claim that their more responsible membership should not bear the obligation to pay for the consequences of reckless speech.

Second, Ms. Longrie seems to forget where her role as an individual stops and her role as an elected representative begins. When she speaks as an elected official, she is speaking for those she represents; even, and perhaps especially, for those who did not vote for her.

Stephan