Protecting Free Speech in Dedham

In the murder trial of Karen Read, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts didn’t just try the defendant—they tried the First Amendment, too. With the blessing of the Superior Court, the state imposed a sweeping “buffer zone” around the Dedham courthouse, banning anyone from displaying signs, using sound equipment, or expressing a viewpoint about the trial within 200 feet of the building.

The justification? Convenience. The effect? Censorship.

Representing independent journalists and concerned citizens, we filed federal lawsuits challenging this unconstitutional “prior restraint” in conjunction with the Center for American Liberty. Peaceful speech about the Read trial was banned. Commercial speech, casual banter, and Bruins chants? All permitted. The government carved out an exception for anything except criticism. That’s not a neutral rule—that’s a muzzle.

Police threatened reporters for filming on public sidewalks. One officer ripped a sticker off a man’s jacket because it expressed the “wrong” opinion. Another told a journalist he wasn’t “real media.” These aren’t isolated incidents, but rather the predictable result of an order so vague and overbroad that it hands raw discretion to law enforcement and invites viewpoint discrimination.

The sidewalk in front of a courthouse has always been a place for protest, commentary, and yes — journalism. The First Amendment wasn’t drafted to protect popular speech in polite spaces. It exists because of moments like this, when the government overreaches, and people speak anyway. We’re proud to represent those people. Because when the state tries to shut you up, we speak louder.