Democrat appointed Speaker of the NH House Shawn Jasper (R) - threatening Free Speech in the House? - Granite Grok

Democrat appointed Speaker of the NH House Shawn Jasper (R) – threatening Free Speech in the House?

Once again with Spring, the little birdies start tweeting again – even if Spring is measuring 11 degrees outside and this is pretty good one.  So, one would think that the NH House Speaker Shawn Jasper (Democrat appointed, if you don’t already know) would be a fine upstanding supporter of Free Speech.  After all, not only is Free Speech protected by the US Constitution:

First Amendment, US Constitution:

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.

But so does our NH Constitution, as the Bill of Rights comes FIRST in our Constitution – to protect Individuals FIRST (and then and only then does it talk about Government):

[Art.] 22. [Free Speech; Liberty of the Press.] Free speech and liberty of the press are essential to the security of freedom in a state: They ought, therefore, to be inviolably preserved.

And if our Lawmakers can’t even follow that, well, they (at the least) deserve all the mocking that we citizens can muster!  After all, they ALL swore an oath to protect and preserve it – not to ignore or subvert it.  And the words make it clear – Inviolate to deny Free Speech to an Individual. But, I guess, the Democrat supported NH Speaker of the House has decided that he knows better and has his own Pen and Phone:


I don’t like to weigh into these discussions, but Part 2 Article 22 of the State Constitution gives the legislature the ability to restrict speech of the members of the House. The House has done just that by adopting Mason’s Rules. Chapter 13 on Decorum in Debate is a must read for all members, if they believe there are no restrictions on what they can say.

So, what does Part Two (e.g. NOT the most important Party) and Article 22 say in rather plain words for the House of Representatives (emphasis mine)?

[Art.] 22. [House to Elect Speaker and Officers, Settle Rules of Proceedings, and Punish Misconduct.] The house of representatives shall choose their own speaker, appoint their own officers, and settle the rules of proceedings in their own house; and shall be judge of the returns, elections, and qualifications, of its members, as pointed out in this constitution. They shall have authority to punish, by imprisonment, every person who shall be guilty of disrespect to the house, in its presence, by any disorderly and contemptuous behavior, or by threatening, or ill treating, any of its members; or by obstructing its deliberations; every person guilty of a breach of its privileges, in making arrests for debt, or by assaulting any member during his attendance at any session; in assaulting or disturbing any one of its officers in the execution of any order or procedure of the house; in assaulting any witness, or other person, ordered to attend, by and during his attendance of the house; or in rescuing any person arrested by order of the house, knowing them to be such.

One could look at the above and scratch their heads and go “ok, maybe?”  but look at what the only stated remedy is – by imprisonment.  Is that what Jasper is threatening?

I see no clause that speaks directly to the diminishment of Free Speech.  I also wonder, if given this Speaker, if Due Process would be followed.  Let’s go hypothetical – if a vote was taken against a Conservative Republican for “disorderly and contemptuous” speech, or speech designated to be of a “disrespectful” nature, or even speech deemed “obstructing” – if it was the Speaker who so is inclined to invoke one of those clauses in a case where a Republican was arguing in favor of a Republican Principle?

I also wonder, if such a vote was taken and it was the Democrats voting as a block to find that Republican guilty, would that turn the rest of the Republicans against him?  Would the Chairs and Vice-Chairs resign in protest?

Or would be, once again, Republicans literally acting like Democrats and supporting THEM instead of their own members?

Look, I’m no lawyer and I don’t play one on a blog.  But I do know that the Constitutions were written in plain words with those words carefully chosen in full measure of their plain and simple meanings.  After all, before these Professional Politicians came about, we had the Citizen legislators and early on, they were the quintessential Farmer who put down their tools, served, and returned.  Our Constitutions were written to be well understood.

And this: really, does Mason’s Rules trump the plain words of the NH Constitution?

>