To the Editor,
Vermont’s constitution turns 250 next July. The rights it declares are old; the pressure on them is new.
Vermonters have taken to their village greens in numbers not seen in years. They are finding permits, fees, and insurance requirements waiting for them, and more being written. At least one town in every county in Vermont has an ordinance or policy on the books regulating assembly or speech. And in July 2025, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns advised every city and town in Vermont to adopt a policy on protests. Both halves of that story are close to home. Ludlow’s ordinance on unlawful assemblies, already on the books, is arguably in direct conflict with a First Amendment decision of the United States Supreme Court. In Chester, where I own a home, a first draft of a rule for the town Green reached the selectboard for its Oct. 7 meeting.
Vermont’s constitution is older than the First Amendment and differently made. It does not say what government may not abridge; it says what the people have. It declares that “the people have a right to assemble together,” and it commands that the rights it declares “ought not to be violated on any pretence [sic] whatsoever.” It carries a history almost no one remembers: In 1786, asked to confine assembly to gatherings held “in a legal way,” a Vermont convention refused. The Vermont Supreme Court has never said how far that promise reaches.
I am a retired lawyer, and I have taken up that question in an article, “The People Have a Right,” which makes the case that the promise reaches the village green, and reaches further than the First Amendment does. It can be read or downloaded without charge at www.ssrn.com/abstract=7524318. Until the Court speaks, the towns writing the rules and the neighbors gathering on the greens are both working without Vermont’s answer.
Before Vermont celebrates its constitution, Vermonters – and their selectboards – should hear what it says.
Sincerely,
Don Clark
Chester, Vt.