Ron Paul supporter battles Hawthorne Borough

Looks like either Hawthorne is going to have to concede, or its going to cost their tax payers alot of money down the road.

 Its about time people started standing up for their rights, cause surely the establishment liberal republicans seem to have little problem with letting government become invasive of peoples' individual rights and liberties. 

It might seem like a small, nuance of an issue, but its these very minute issues that keeps the Democrats in power in New Jersey.  When was the last time you heard of a Republican standing up to protect someone else's rights?

 Kudos to Mr. Gause.

Although I am and never ever would have been a Ron “Wack Job” Paul supporter, Hawthorne is going to find that their Law is Unconstitutional. 

There was a challenge to this type of law I believe many years ago to the Supreme Court and it was ruled in the favor of the sign as the right to free speech.  I think it was someone in a midwestern state that had challenged it.

Despite Mad Max's opinion that Ron Paul is a "wack job" (those who live in glass houses Max, many think the same of you)  I think this is excellent news.

 I know Andy personally, and he has been defending civil liberties well before it became fashionable among some of the "more conservative" republicans as of late. I have to agree with RLC that Democrats continually beat up our party because we're too busy focused solely on business, meanwhile they are out there pressing the flesh and making sure that local issues, such as this, are entirely owned by their party.

In the end we look like a bunch of greedy, rich old men who would sell our own mothers up a river for a buck.

 Perhaps if the Republicans learned a little humility and followed the principals of Jefferson, we would be in much better shape.

 Oh, and I got the hint about "Phase Two".. hehehe. 

Check Out: http://www.murraysabrin.com

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO….. He's a “WACK JOB” and if you can't or haven't seen that then you're in the same boat as him and up a creek without a paddle..................or just another “WACK JOB” from New Jersey!!!!

I think we're starting to stray off topic just a little bit. The issue at hand here, even as Andy has stated, is not support of Ron Paul. No matter whose name was on the sign, this would've happened.

Andy, I wish you the best with your case. Dealing with municipal hacks who make up their own rules is no picnic. At least you have an excellent lawyer as Rick stated earlier.

"Liberals are people who will believe anything...twice."- William F. Buckley

You are a true patriot.  Hope to be with you on 3/20.  This is definitely a free speech issue that needs to be addressed.  Perhaps the other DEMOPUBLICAN boroughs throughout NJ will wake up to the fact that there are people who actually live by the constitution and are willing to stand up for the rights granted to US, the citizens of NJ and the United States of America.  Far too easy for these town councils to do as they deem fit, mostly to appease those that they serve.  Unfortunately, NOT the regular citizen. 

...this is not about the name on the sign, it's about the sign.

I seriously doubt that Sean Colon would want to get involved on Andy's behalf  had it been a McCain, Rudy, Romney, Huckabee, Clinton or Obama sign on his lawn. A beautiful thing to you nepotism is, eh Sean?

As I said before Andy, best of luck to you. This sort of thing should not be happening to anybody on either side of the political aisle and all sides should oppose this kind of nonsense.

"Liberals are people who will believe anything...twice."- William F. Buckley

Fighting these guys in municiple court isn't enough.  He should file a lawsuit against the town for violating his civil rights.

John, you are correct.  In that case, Jiminez v. City of Paterson, Mr. Jiminez's attorney, Peter Cammarano, Esq. of Livingston, successfully argued that Paterson's sign ordinance was unconstitutional as it violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Paragraphs 1 and 6 of the New Jersey Constitution.  Believe it or not, this case was decided in in state court in 2006.  The Boehm case, in Franklin Lakes, was decided in federal court in 2001.  Both of these cases, coming from municipalities bordering Hawthorne, have identical facts to Mr. Gause's case.  Yet, the unconstitutional ordinance still lives in Hawthorne--and Mr. Gause has had one of our most basic rights violated.  We expect that summons against him will be dismissed and that the unlawful ordinance will be immediately repealed.  If it is not, we will continue the fight.