Civil Liberties

Arkansas Town Bans Organizations Lest They Cause 'Discourse'


Annoyed by criticism from a local political group, the Gould, Arkansas, city council decided to wish it away. Last month it passed an ordinance abolishing the Gould Citizens Advisory Council, which it accused of "causing confusion and discourse among the citizens." It also forbade Mayor Earnest Nash Jr., a member of the irksome group, to meet "any organization in any location," whether "inside or outside Gould city limits," without the city council's permission. For good measure, Gould's legislators declared that "no new organizations shall be allowed to exist in the City of Gould without approval from a majority of the City Council." Nash vetoed all three bills, but last week the city council voted to override him. "I've seen some humdingers," Arkansas Municipal League General Counsel Mark Hayes tells The New York Times, "but never any ordinance like this." Calling the restrictions on freedom of association "blatantly unconstitutional," Nash reports that "for the most part, people are just ignoring them." Councilwoman Sonya Farley "said she would probably vote to rewrite the ordinances with more constitutionally sensitive wording."

NEXT: Gang of Six Proposes Cutting Spending on Federal Health Programs By $200 Billion. How? They'll Let You Know When They Figure It Out

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. All of these city councillors have IQ’s below 90. That’s the only explanation.

    I’m sure they meant “causing confusion and distress” and they just happened to make an amusing error in their wording.

    Arkansas has apparently entered the Idiocracy world.

    1. I think discord is what they were looking for.

      1. No, they’re just abject idiots. Are you surprised?

        1. Surprised that they are fascists or that they lack an understanding of the english language?

          No, I’m not.

          (and does it count as a godwin when it’s true?)

          1. Yes, but it doesn’t count against you.

          2. Greer|7.20.11 @ 3:07PM|#
            Surprised that they are fascists or that they lack an understanding of the english language?

            It very well could be both

      2. They meant “intercourse.”

        1. “Disc course” — it’s well-known that Arkansas is hostile to frisbee golf.

        2. Intercourse the penguin!

    2. I vote “discord”, or is that giving them too much credit?

      1. Ize thinkin’ they wuz sayin’ “diss course right here…”. Like dat.

        But datd be RACIST!

    3. You do understand that the average IQ is 100?

      1. And half of all Americans have below average intelligence! TheGovernment must DO SOMETHING at once! Like repealing the law of averages!

  2. We’ll be seeing a lot more of this as the pensions start coming due.

  3. “people are just ignoring them”

  4. Councilwoman Sonya Farley “said she would probably vote to rewrite the ordinances with more constitutionally sensitive wording.”

    If she manages to write an ordinance that bans unapproved associations without blatantly violating the Constitution, she will deserve the Nobel Prize for Literature.

    1. She deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for merely having the potential to write the ordinance within constitutional guidelines

      Isn’t that their criteria these days?

      1. Oh, snap!

    2. or a presidency…

    3. “”with more constitutionally sensitive wording.”””

      Wow, so the Constitution is right up there with retarded people.

      We don’t to follow the Constitution, just sensitive wording to make it sound like you’re giving it some respect. Jeeezzzzzzz

  5. Looks like someone took the wrong lesson from Quartzsite Arizona.

  6. If this were a just world, every councilman that voted for these abominable regulations would face immediate dismissal from office and prosecution for treason. Let the fuckers deal with that.

    1. Yes, don’t they take some sort of oath to uphold the constitution?

      Can’t they be prosecuted for violating their oaths of office?

      They should at least be impeached.

      1. If the sitting members of the Supreme Court can fail to uphold the constitution, I think we can give the city council of podunk backwater USA a pass…

  7. In this town, you think only good thoughts if you don’t want to end up in the Cornfield.

    1. And He Who Walks Behind The Rows did say, “I will send discoursers amongst you: a man and a woman. These discoursers will be unbelievers and profaners of the holy. But they will sorely test you, for they have great power, even greater than that of the Kochs!

  8. Discourse must be stopped in our lifetimes. We hereby ban anybody who disagrees with us. Off with their heads! I didn’t hear a “harumph” out of that one!

    1. I honestly don’t understand how what these councilmen did isn’t wholly criminal.

      1. shouldn’t there be a criminal prosecution by the justice dept for denying civil rights?

        1. Oh, what a giveaway THAT was! Look, I’m bein’ repressed! I’m bein’ repressed!!

          1. Come see the violence inherent in the system!1!1!

      2. Don’t you have a revolution to start? Passing laws is legal–let the courts decide if they are constitutional. That’s how it works.

        1. This is the most absurdly stupid comment I’ve seen all day. And I read a Balloon Juice thread.

        2. “Passing laws is legal–let the courts decide if they are constitutional. ”

          I don’t know. This seems an aweful lot like delberiate misuse of office powers. I’m sure that has to be against some law.

        3. So we should accept legislatures passing clearly illegal laws. We can’t have legislatues pass laws willy-nilly and hope the courts clean up. These people should not be elected to anything ever again.

        4. No, Tony/Spoof, passing constitutional law is legal, passing unconstitutional law is illegal. There’s a big difference between passing something that might conflict with some clause in the constitution, and something that is in direct violation of it.
          Most people are fine with allowing courts to settle a complex and technical case involving free speech or religion, but there is no constitutional reason to ban the rights of people to peacefully assemble. Then again, I’m sure this flavor of tyranny and authoritarianism suits your fancy.

          1. Well said. Additionally, with the current judicial fad of “deference to the legislature”, shirking your responsibility to follow the constitution while writing laws is actively dangerous. There is no “backup plan” of having the courts call foul if you get it wrong.

            See: Eminent Domain abuse, Civil Asset Forfeiture, drug prohibition, and on and on and on….

  9. OT:

    How many aneurysms and cranial detonations and BS (butthurt syndrome) reports would you get if you advertised the movie with that poster in Europe?

    1. Dude looks fucking gay.

  10. libtoids & this city council both dislike freedom of association & denial of due process whether city groups or TEH UNIONZZ

    1. but nott corprocatons there diffrent i realy am a fuckin retad lol

      1. derka derka muhamnsd jihad jerkooff rotor bat shill fcuk! Max

        1. my estocker is back hi old mex plz go way

          1. Re: OO,
            I don’t resort to childish antics such as paroding you, OO, as you are already your own parody.

            1. Dat’s rite, Ol’ Messican. You tell dat old boy to go FUK hizself. He’s a goddammed racist muhrfuckin bastard.

              FUCK you Urine, you muhfuckuh!

              1. You sound like the croc in Pearls Before Swine.

                1. Hey zeeba neighba!

    2. the spoofing doesnt cover-up libtoid denial of civil rights to TEH UNIONZZZ

      1. Unions DO have a right to organize, but that doesn’t mean they have a right to a job on their terms.

        1. correct, the members have a right to a job on NEGOIATED TERMS which are agreed to by mgmt & the rank n file.

          1. And said businesses have a right to GO BANKRUPT when the union’s demands render the company unprofitable.

            1. so mgmt would agree to terms that bankrupt them?

              1. FUCK. When management are politicians or government bureaucrats. Are you really this stupid?

              2. OO|7.20.11 @ 4:24PM|#
                so mgmt would agree to terms that bankrupt them?

                I guess you haven’t been reading the news for the last few years.

          2. THE TAX PAYER.

            FUCK OFF URINE.

            1. that’s the ol libtoid screed about TEH UNIONZZZ

              1. I know when you say “teh” 500 times it’s supposed to make me look stupid, but for whatever reason, it sure makes you look stupid.

          3. Yaz you-yuns ar gud nd wee nede teechurs wid tennyerr lyke mee too eddy-you-kate peepul lyke OO!

  11. So does that mean that council meetings are banned and if so wasn’t the meeting in which this legislation passed an illegal act, which means the law was formed based on an illegal act making that law illegal. *my head hurts* Or did they pass the law, get in their time machine and go back to make it retroactive?

    1. So…we’re not to allow ‘im to leave the room, even if you come and get ‘im…

  12. Enacting an unconstitutional law, and enforcement of such law, should be punishable by open season for vigilantes to have at you.


      Treason. Egregious violation of the oath of office. Conspiracy to infringe and desecrate supreme law.

      These should all be crimes. And they should all carry severe repercussions.

      Good thing it’s fairly small; I hope the population arms itself and lynches the fuckers in front of town hall.

      1. Just don’t capture it on video. That’d violate wiretapping laws.

  13. Lackwit dogs!

  14. Well, I hope they have a few million to defend the action and pay out damages, because that’s what’s coming.

    For the Gould, Arkansas city council, here’s some cheap legal advice (for free, I’ll note that, for legal purposes, you’re “Congress”):

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    1. OMG! Like, that’s so old. Like, what does “assemble” really mean? Gosh! “Shall”? What is this, like a hundred billion years ago or something? They should, like, rewrite it in English, we’re not, like, King Arthur! As if!

    2. Great, Pro L. Now that they think they’re Congress, they’ll probably go and declare war on somebody.

      1. Busted!

      2. I vote to invade Branson and free Yakoff Smirnoff.

        1. What a country!

    3. Or, in a more just and moral world, we’d just note that nowhere is government GRANTED the authority to regulate organization of peoples for any purpose, economic or political. Government may only do what it is granted powers to do, not what it is not specifically prohibited from doing.

      1. Agreed. But this one is extra super, so it was specifically called out in that yellowing document.

    4. and yet PL ud deny freedom-of-association AND due process to union members

      1. I would?

        1. next public sector union thread ill remind u. should be soon

          1. Way to move the goalposts, dipshit.

            There are other unions besides public sector unions.

      2. If you’re going to talk, do so with fewer cocks in your mouth.

        1. i dont eat rooster, only hens.

        2. Gibby, don’t bother. It either is a moron or is so committed to playing a moron, there’s little to accomplish interacting with it. It’s a scab that would heal if everyone could just stop scratching it.

          1. if that’s gibby’s contribution, ur correct, dont bother.

  15. Nothing is quite as bad as an ignorant hillbilly with a scrap of authority.

    1. This “constitutional scholar”, for one, agrees wholeheartedly.

    2. Roscoe!!! Get them Duke boys!

      1. It’s funny because Cooter was elected to congress in Georgia.

        1. One of those things that makes our reality the superior one.

    3. Wasn’t aware there were any hillbillies in the California assembly.

      1. Hillbillies are everywhere. Like bedbugs and frozen yogurt places.

        1. Got bedbugs. Dash of PCP in a steam bottle will get them right out.


            1. Foiled me again, NYT! Fucking do-gooders. Hard to be a villain these days.

    4. Seriously, Warty, haven’t you been paying ANY attention? Ignorant hillbillies are good for a laugh, but it takes a passle of true intellectuals to fuck things up on a super-massive scale.

    5. Gould is in the Mississippi delta. Its residents are not ignorant Hillbillies; they are ignorant flatlanders.

      And SF, Hillbillies are not quite everywhere. We go to a lot of places, but we can’t stand flat country with muddy creeks. I bet not one of us has taken up residence in Gould.

  16. You can count on it, punk!

    *twirls baton*

  17. And I’m too much of an ignorant hillbilly to get these here threaded comments.

    1. I didn’t even know he had died, until I looked at the wiki after reading your handle.

  18. [The] Gould, Arkansas, city council decided to […] passed an ordinance abolishing the Gould Citizens Advisory Council, which it [the council] accused [the GCAC] of “causing confusion and discourse among the citizens.”

    Which means the good people of the city council of Gould, AR, do not know the meaning of the word “discourse.”

    1. Actually, maybe they do. Nothing the government hates more than discourse among the people.

  19. Councilwoman Sonya Farley “said she would probably vote to rewrite the ordinances with more constitutionally sensitive wording.

    *slaps forehead*

    1. Their new language will use the phrase “notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the U.S. Constitution or the Arkansas Constitution. . . .”

    2. Here’s how people should respond:

      1) Ignore the ordinances.

      2) If enforcement is attempted, resist violently; if necessary, do so with arms.

      This is just beyond unbelievable.

      1. Yes. I have long suspected that the Second Amendment immediately follows the peaceable assembly/petition the government clause to imply “and just in case the government should disperse the assembly and tear up the petition . . . .”

  20. Councilwoman Sonya Farley “said she would probably vote to rewrite the ordinances with more constitutionally sensitive wording.”

    Here’s a try:
    “1) The City of Gould will continue to pay lip service to the Citizens Advisory Council, and and the City Council will no longer cause confusion and discourse among the citizens by enacting blatantly retarded laws.

    2) The mayor may only meet with any organization inside or outside the city limits of Gould without the permission of the Council if he does not seek permission, or if he, upon seeking permission, does not receive it. 3) no new organizations shall be allowed to exist in the City of Gould without either approval from a majority of the City Council, or a vote by the members of such new organization to allow its own existence. A new organization which have not yet held a vote of its members to allow its existence may exist until such time as a vote is held. Organizations which cease to exist prior to a vote will no longer exist, but may exist again prior to a vote.

    4) The City of Gould shall rename itself to Goa’uld, and the City Councilmembers shall henceforth be known as System Lords. This shall not be construed as license for councilmembers to take human hosts.”

    Section 4 is optional, and may be replaced with a statement to the effect that that which is a tautology shall be true by its own definition.

  21. “Calling the restrictions on freedom of association “blatantly unconstitutional,” Nash reports that “for the most part, people are just ignoring them.”

    No: They are just plain stupid.

    “Farley “said she would probably vote to rewrite the ordinances with more constitutionally sensitive wording.”

    Case in point: She apparently thinks the problem here is merely with the wording.

  22. I would like to think the people of Gould will respond to the ban by gathering at the next City Council meeting and chanting,







    Until Sonya Farley tenders her resignation.

  23. I’m pretty sure that won’t happen.

  24. The dictionary…

    … free association….

    …how does it work?

    This seems like one of those “don’t blame me: I voted for Kodos” moments.

  25. It also forbade Mayor Earnest Nash Jr., a member of the irksome group, to meet “any organization in any location,” whether “inside or outside Gould city limits

    Hold the next meeting outside of the city limits with a sign that says “FUCK. YOU.”

  26. For all intensive porpoises, failure to tow the party lion does cause confusion and discourse, and must be considered bee on the pail.

  27. You know, if a cop violates someone’s civil rights, it can be a crime, if I’m not mistaken. Why don’t the same rules apply to ordinance-writers?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.