Would ACLU Squelch Free Speech of Its Own Officials?
by Fred Jackson and Jody Brown
May 31, 2006
(AgapePress) - - It appears the ACLU is seeking to muzzle some of its own board members. The American Civil Liberties Union is often portrayed as a great defender of free speech -- with the exception, some would say, of Christian speech in the public square. But now comes word in a New York Times report that the ACLU is weighing new standards that would discourage its board members from publicly criticizing the organization's policies and internal administration.
The committee proposing the new standards says "where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting the fact of such disagreement." It also states that "a director may publicly disagree with an ACLU policy position, but may not criticize the ACLU board of staff."
The proposals go on to say that directors should remember that such public criticism could have an adverse effect on the ACLU in terms of public support and fund-raising.
According to the Times story, some former board members are shocked at the proposed gag order, saying such a measure could not possibly be more contrary to the reason the ACLU exists.
The Times seems to imply that the proposed new standards stem from an internal squabble between Anthony Romero, executive director for the ACLU, and several board members who have gone on record as critical of not just the organization's judgment, but also Romero's way of handling things.
For example, the NYT notes the committee tasked with setting new standards for board members was formed just after two board members -- Wendy Kaminer and Michael Meyers -- had publicly criticized Romero and the board for endorsing legislation that some board members felt threatened free speech. At the time Kaminer was quoted in the New York Sun as saying she found it "quite appalling that the ACLU is actively supporting this."
At a subsequent board meeting, according to the Times, Romero asked two other dissenting board members to step outside the meeting room where he verbally chastised them for not demonstrating support for him during discussions regarding publicly aired dissent from board members.
The board is scheduled to discuss the proposals at its meeting in June.
