- Advertisement -

In Brevard County, Florida, two recent incidents involving the removal of political campaign signs have raised questions about law enforcement’s interpretation of the law and potential disparities in prosecution.

- Advertisement -

Incident 1: Non-Arrest of Individual Removing Kamala Harris Signs

An individual was captured on video removing Kamala Harris campaign signs from public property. When questioned by deputies from the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office, the individual invoked the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. According to Kathy Smith, the owner of the signs, the Sheriff’s Office told her they declined to arrest or charge the individual, citing an interpretation of Florida Statute 106.1435 that they believe permits the public to remove political signs from public property.

Kathy told us in a statement, “I was shocked that the deputy, when asked if we could remove signs, she said Yes if the person who put them in does not permit/ permission from the property owner to have it them there then you can remove them.
The officer made it very clear that if you have permission from the business or property owner then it is stealing if you take them but if it is just put out then anyone is free to remove it. I find this very hard to believe as true.”

Incident 2: Arrest Warrant for Titusville Mayoral Candidate

In a separate case, Vickie Conklin, a NPA candidate for Titusville Mayor was issued a warrant for her arrest by the Titusville Police Department for allegedly removing political signs placed by her Republican opponent from public property. The Titusville Police state that they worked closely with Brevard Supervisor of Elections Tim Bobanic as well as the State Attorney’s office to ensure the case was handled properly.

The police report states Conklin admitted to removing the signs after the signs were placed in front of a campaign location that she was set to use the next day. Conklin told police that one of the signs read “Brevard Democrats” with her picture and her name, which was misspelled, on it.

Conklin told officers that she did not authorize or endorse such a sign and removed the two signs from the location. Conklin was charged with theft, an action contrasts sharply with the non-arrest in the previous incident, prompting concerns about inconsistent enforcement.

Legal Interpretation and First Amendment Implications

Florida Statute 106.1435 outlines the responsibilities of candidates regarding the removal of political advertisements after a campaign is over, but does not explicitly grant the public the right to remove such signs from public property. Political signs are generally considered the property of the candidate or campaign, and unauthorized removal can be construed as theft or tampering. Moreover, political signs are a form of protected speech under the First Amendment. Unauthorized removal infringes upon the campaign’s or individual’s right to express their political views. Refusing to prosecute those who remove those signs could be seen by some as the government infringing on one’s constitutional rights and election interference.

Precedent in Florida

Similar cases in Florida have resulted in arrests and charges. For instance, in Melbourne Beach, two teenagers were arrested for stealing and vandalizing campaign signs in a local political race. The West Melbourne Police Department took action after the candidate tracked the alleged thieves using a hidden tracking device.

The contrasting outcomes in these cases highlight potential inconsistencies in the enforcement of laws related to political sign removal in Brevard County. The differing interpretations of the statute and the apparent disparity in prosecution raise concerns about equal application of the law and the protection of First Amendment rights.