A federal court has deemed a resolution in a Pennsylvania community unconstitutional, which had prohibited the display of an American flag with a thin blue line on all township property. The ruling, which addresses the flag’s use as part of the police union’s logo, was made on Monday.
The dispute originated in Springfield Township, located about 15 miles from Philadelphia, and centered around the use of a black-and-white American flag with a horizontal blue stripe. The township argued that this flag was causing “discontent and distrust” within the community towards the police.
However, U.S. District Judge Karen Marston concluded that the prohibition of the thin blue line flag violated the First Amendment by restricting the free speech of public employees. In her court opinion, Marston highlighted the township’s claim that the flag was “offensive” and “racist,” stating that the First Amendment protects speech even when it is considered offensive.
Wally Zimolong, the attorney representing the police officers, hailed the court’s ruling as a triumph for the First Amendment and free speech. He emphasized that it demonstrated that the government cannot engage in viewpoint discrimination based on disagreement or offense towards a particular message.
When contacted for comment, the township and their attorney did not immediately respond.
The tensions arose when the township police department’s union decided to incorporate the flag into its logo in 2021. Some commissioners in the township opposed this decision due to the flag’s association with the Blue Lives Matter movement, which has been used by some police supporters in response to the Black Lives Matter movement.
Discussions between the commissioners and the police union took place to address the logo issue, but the union voted against making any changes. The township offered to cover the cost of designing a new logo, stating that a private donor had agreed to contribute up to $10,000, but the union declined.
In October 2022, the situation escalated when the township’s lawyer and manager sent a cease-and-desist letter to the union. The letter claimed that the flag’s use in the union’s logo “unnecessarily exacerbates the ongoing conflict between police officers and the communities they serve” and directed the union to stop using the flag or remove Springfield Township from its name.
After the union refused to comply, the commissioners implemented a policy that prohibited township employees, agents, or consultants from displaying the flag while on duty or representing the township. The policy also forbade the display of the flag on personal property brought into township buildings or on township-owned property, including vehicles.
The police officers who filed the lawsuit, along with the statewide police union, argued that the flag represented a “show of support” for law enforcement and symbolized the preservation of the rule of law, the protection of peace and freedom, the sacrifice of fallen officers, and the dedication of law enforcement. They expressed their desire to continue displaying the flag in township buildings and publicly.
The court sided with the officers, ruling that the township had failed to demonstrate any real harm caused by the flag and that the ban did not effectively address any such harm.
Judge Marston also criticized the township’s characterization of the flag as “racist” and “offensive,” stating that such claims bordered on unprofessional. She observed that these repeated assertions had significantly affected the morale of the police force, as they were being labeled as racist along with the flag.
However, Marston acknowledged that the flag may indeed carry racial undertones for certain members of the community, as some of the individual plaintiffs admitted. Despite this, she denied a request to impose sanctions on the township.
In conclusion, the federal court’s ruling declared the resolution in Springfield Township unconstitutional, allowing the display of the thin blue line flag on township property.
