#

The fight over Nashua’s City Hall Plaza flagpole isn’t over as residents Beth and Stephen Scaer filed an appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston this week, arguing the city is abusing the law to get away with First Amendment violations.

The Scaers, represented by the Institute for Free Speech, took Nashua to court last year after city officials denied them permission to fly an ‘Appeal to Heaven’ Pine Tree flag on City Hall’s “Citizens’ Flag Pole.” According to the lawsuit, the city used vague language in its 2022 flagpole policy to deny the request.

In March, United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty ruled against the couple. In her ruling, McCafferty agreed with Magistrate Judge Talesha Saint-Marc’s December report on the case which argued the city is exempt from First Amendment considerations thanks to the flagpole policy that defined the pole as government property. 

“[Saint-Marc] correctly found that the undisputed facts indicate that the flags displayed on the Citizen Flag Pole pursuant to Nashua’s 2022 Flagpole Policy constituted government speech not regulated by the First Amendment,” McCafferty wrote.

But Nathan Ristuccia and Endel Kolde, the attorneys representing the Scaers, say in their appeal that Nashua is simply using government speech rules to engage in viewpoint discrimination.

“Nashua officials believe that they can manipulate government speech doctrine to subsidize viewpoints that they like and discriminate against citizens whose views they disfavor, Ristuccia and Kolde write. “The City has sought to maintain a Citizen Flag Pole in front of City Hall as a forum for favored constituents, while using its written policies to create a superficial appearance of compliance with controlling precedent. But the city discriminates against minority and dissenting views—exactly those views that need First Amendment protection.”

From 2017 through to 2022, Nashua allowed residents to fly flags at the City Hall Plaza with no written policy for oversight or content restriction. After the city of Boston lost a United States Supreme Court case for banning a Christian group’s flag from its citizens’ City Hall flag pole, Nashua created a written policy to give officials veto power over citizens’ flags. In so doing, according to McCafferty’s ruling, Nashua transformed the flagpole from being a free speech zone, into a government speech zone.

But Ristuccia and Kolde point out that Nashua rejected flags it did not like before the 2022 policy was written.

“Both before and after the formation of the 2022 policy, Nashua officials rejected flags whose messages they disfavored,” Ristuccia and Kolde write.

According to the AmericanFlags.com website, the Appeal to Heaven flag was designed by Colonel Joseph Reed, who served as the personal secretary to George Washington. Originally commissioned for use on six military cruiser ships, the flag was adopted on October 21, 1775. It became the official Massachusetts Navy flag in 1776.”

The pine tree was a symbol of New England and its wealth of natural resources in colonial America. The “Appeal to Heaven” message is a reference to British philosopher John Locke, whose writings on self government greatly influenced the founders.

The Scaers wanted to fly the Appeal to Heaven flag to commemorate Granite Staters who fought in the Battle of Bunker Hill in the opening days of the Revolutionary War. But the city rejected their application on the grounds that the Pine Tree flag “is not in harmony with the message that the City wishes to express and endorse.”

Nashua has allowed residents to fly flags celebrating different religious sects, nationalities, and sexual identities for years. However, Nashua began to take a dim view of some flags, especially those proposed by the Scaers.

Beth Scaer got permission to fly a “Save Women’s Sports flag” for one week in 2020, but it was removed after 24 hours and city staff told her it was “transphobic.”

Stephen Scaer applied to fly a “Detransitioner Awareness Flag” in 2024 to commemorate people who reverse their sex change procedures. He was also told that the symbol “is not in harmony with the message that the City wishes to express and endorse.”

City Attorney Jonathan Barnes argued in court that flying the Pine Tree flag was akin to displaying a Nazi symbol on Hitler’s birthday.

“I mean, [Ristuccia] would have you believe that we can raise the Nazi flag to commemorate Hitler’s birthday. I think that’s totally unreasonable, and it certainly wouldn’t be in the city’s best interests to do that,” Barnes said in court.

The Pine Tree flag is a patriotic symbol with a history with links to the 1772 Pine Tree Riot in Weare, N.H. It was one of the earliest acts of rebellion against British authority in the American colonies, and predates the Boston Tea Party. The dispute, over enforcement of British laws restricting the use of valuable white pine trees, resulted in a group of local men storming the inn in Weare where representatives of the British government were staying and driving them out of town.

The flag was a popular symbol of resistance among New England colonists and its use spread through the Continental Army. George Washington had the flag flown from schooners commissioned for the war.

But, recently, the flag has also been adopted by some right-wing extremists. The flag is used by some in the Christian Dominionist sphere who advocate overthrowing democracy in order to create a Christian theocratic form of government.

It’s not an Appeal to Heaven, but to the First Circuit Court of Appeals for Nashua residents Beth and Stephen Scaer in their Pine Tree flag fight with the city.

The Scaers filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction against Nashua after they were denied an application to fly the Revolutionary War-era banner, which includes the slogan “An Appeal to Heaven,” by Nashua officials. On Friday, lawyers for the Scaers’ filed notice in the federal court of their intention to go to the appeals court in Boston.

Last Month, United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty denied their motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling the couple was likely to lose their case on the merits. McCafferty relied on Magistrate Judge Talesha Saint-Marc’s review and report of the case in her ruling. 

According to McCafferty and Saint-Marc, the city did not violate the Scaers’ free speech rights when it denied their flag application. They argue the city’s application process for requests to fly flags on the city’s Citizen’s Flag Pole is an example of an allowable government speech restriction that does not infringe on the First Amendment.

Nathan Ristuccia, an attorney with the legal nonprofit The Institute for Free Speech, insists the court is wrong and that the treatment of the Scaers, who are outspoken political conservatives, is viewpoint discrimination.

“The City of Nashua cannot manipulate government speech doctrine into a ruse for subsidizing viewpoints they like and discriminating against those they disfavor,” Ristuccia wrote in a motion arguing against Saint-Marc’s report. “The City has sought to maintain the Citizen Flag Pole as a forum for favored constituents while using its written policy to create a superficial appearance of compliance with (prior free speech ruling) Shurtleff v. City of Boston.”

In the past, the Nashua city government has allowed flags celebrating Pride Month, transgender rights, as well as ethnic heritage with the national flags of Greece and the Dominican Republic. However, the city has also rejected previous requests to fly symbols advocating pro-life politics, libertarianism, and protecting women’s sports from biological males. 

The city adopted a flag pole policy in 2022, after several rejected applications, that states in part, “[the] flag pole is not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public.”

Ristuccia calls the policy an attempt at invoking “magic words” to get around the First Amendment claims of people whose applications were rejected. The Scaers had their Pine Tree Riot flag rejected in 2024 when the city informed them the Revolutionary War banner is not “in harmony with city policies and messages that the city wishes to express and endorse.”

The city’s rejection of the Pine Tree Riot flags is not about Nashua officials harboring royalist sentiment. Instead, officials are being swayed by current political prejudices seemingly shared by Saint-Marc. In her report, Saint-Marc determined the flag the Scaers wanted to fly is a symbol that’s been coopted by the “far right.”

“The record also indicates that the flag was used during the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.,” Saint-Marc wrote.

City Attorney Jonathan Barnes likened the Scaer’s request to fly the Pine Tree Riot flag at city hall to flying a Nazi flag during his arguments in front of Saint-Marc.

“I mean, [Ristuccia] would have you believe that we can raise the Nazi flag to commemorate Hitler’s birthday. I think that’s totally unreasonable, and it certainly wouldn’t be in the city’s best interests to do that,” Barnes said in court.

The 1772 Pine Tree Riot took place in Weare and is considered a pivotal event that led to the American Revolution. The flag has long been associated with patriotic movements. The Scaers wanted to fly the flag on the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill to honor New Hampshire Minutemen.

The City of Nashua did not violate the First Amendment when it rejected resident Beth Scaer’s application to fly the Pine Tree “Appeal to Heaven” flag at city hall, a federal judge ruled this week. But a free speech organization representing Scaer says the fight is far from over.

Magistrate Judge Talesha Saint-Marc issued a report on Monday to Chief District Judge Landya McCafferty recommending the court deny Scaer’s request for an injunction against the city. Scaer was seeking the preliminary injunction to prevent Nashua officials from denying their flag permit applications, or closing down the public flag program.

After being slapped with a lawsuit over free speech violations for refusing to allow Scaer to fly the historic Pine Tree Flag, Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess quietly pulled down the city’s flagpole policy entirely.

Nathan Ristuccia, an attorney with the Free Speech Institute representing Scaer, called Saint-Marc’s report disappointing, but added it’s not the final word in the case. He plans to file objections to Saint-Marc’s report in the coming days.

“Although we are disappointed with the magistrate judge’s recommendation against the preliminary injunction, this is just one early step in the legal process for defending our client’s First Amendment rights,” Ristuccia said. 

Saint-Marc found that since Nashua’s original flag display policy explicitly states the venue is not a place for absolute free expression, city officials are not violating anyone’s rights when they choose to reject some flags. 

“During the time period relevant to the Scaers’ claims, Nashua maintained a written flagpole policy with identifiable guidelines of what it wished to communicate through the flags displayed on the Citizen Flag Pole,” Saint-Marc wrote. “The 2022 Flagpole Policy stated that the ‘potential use of a City flag pole is not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public.’”

Scaer’s attorneys argue having a policy doesn’t free the city from illegally practicing viewpoint discrimination.

Scaer filed her lawsuit against Nashua in September, claiming she was denied the ability to fly the historic Pine Tree flag at City Hall’s “Citizen’s Flag Pole.” According to Scaer’s lawsuit, the city used its vague policy to deny her request. The flag’s origins are linked to events in 1772 in the town of Weare, N.H. Colonists staged a pre-Revolution act of defiance against British rule. Scaer planned to fly the flag to commemorate the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill.

But Saint-Marc again sided with Nashua when she noted that different symbols, like the Pine Tree flag, can have multiple meanings. In this case, the Pine Tree flag could be considered a symbol of the far right as much as a symbol of the Revolutionary War, she wrote.

“The record also indicates that the flag was used during the Jan. 6, 2020 attack on the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.”

Scaer’s supporters are quick to note that far more U.S. flags were flown by rioters that day, and the American flag currently flies outside Nashua City Hall.

Representing the City of Nashua before Saint-Marc last month, attorney Jonathan Barnes compared flying the Pine Tree flag to displaying a Nazi symbol on Hitler’s birthday.

“I mean, [Ristuccia] would have you believe that we can raise the Nazi flag to commemorate Hitler’s birthday. I think that’s totally unreasonable, and it certainly wouldn’t be in the city’s best interests to do that,” Barnes said.

According to the transcript from the Nov. 5 hearing, Ristuccia did not advocate for the display of Nazi symbols.

Barnes also admitted to Saint-Marc that, under its policy, Nashua would ban the national flag of Israel at City Hall as well. The City has previously banned the Palestinian flag, a pro-life flag, and flags supporting people who detransition after sex change procedures.

Saint-Marc’s report will now go to McCafferty for a final decision on the injunction. Even if McCafferty agrees with Saint-Marc on the injunction, the case is far from over.

“The final decision about the preliminary injunction rests with the district judge, who may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate’s recommendation. As the case proceeds, we will continue fighting to protect the rights of every citizen to express their views freely, without government censorship,” Ristuccia said.

The Israeli flag, the white and blue banner with the Star of David, is the official symbol of the state of Israel, one of America’s closest allies. And yet the City of Nashua told a federal judge Israel’s flag is too controversial to fly at City Hall Plaza.

The Pride flag, on the other hand, is more than welcome on Nashua city property, despite being an entirely political symbol of the LGBT movement.

Nashua’s Assistant Corporation Counsel Jonathan Barnes said flying Israel’s flag would spark a flood of angry phone calls and threats, while “reasonable citizens” wouldn’t be bothered by the Pride flag.

Those revelations came last month in federal court as part of the city’s legal defense against a lawsuit filed by resident Beth Scaer. The city rejected her requests to fly the Pine Tree Riot flag and a banner promoting girls-only sports on Nashua’s public flagpole. Scaer claims she’s the victim of viewpoint discrimination by the Democrat-controlled city. She is represented by the Institute for Free Speech and local counsel Roy McCandless.

In the wake of the lawsuit, Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess quietly ended the city’s community flag pole tradition.

During the Nov. 5 hearing before Judge Talesha Saint-Marc, Nashua’s Assistant Corporation Counsel Jonathan Barnes compared the Pine Tree Riot flag to a Nazi flag and a flag for the Soviet Union.

Barnes also brought up the city’s decision to reject a request by Nashua resident Nick Scalera to fly the Palestinian flag on a day set to remember the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. He says that proves the city was not discriminating based on a particular viewpoint.

And, Barnes added, “If someone applied to fly the Israel flag, I would say you would probably reject that, too, because it’s just — you don’t want to wade into those waters. You want to be able to conduct your city business without getting inundated with angry phones, e-mails, and people threatening you on Twitter, or X, whatever it’s called now.”

Saint-Marc noted that “at one point the city accepted the Pride flag. That’s still a controversial position.”

Barnes responded by invoking American Freedom Defense Initiative v. King County (2016) In that case, ads featuring the images of Islamist terrorists were rejected by the transit system, which argued they weren’t suitable. AFDI sued, lost in the lower courts and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case. The district court ruled the space was a “limited public forum” and that the system’s restrictions were “reasonable and viewpoint neutral.” 

“In American Freedom Defense Initiative the ban on less controversial advertising was upheld. It wasn’t all controversial advertising,” Barnes argued.

“So, in the grand scheme of things, you know, there are Pride flags flown all over the country. The White House lights up with the colors in June. There are parades all over the country. There might be some people that are upset by that, but there are some people that are upset by the American flag. They would sooner (fly) the Soviet flag fly. Most reasonable citizens don’t find that subject matter to be controversial,” Barnes said.

“The Pride flag?” the judge asked.

“Correct,” Barnes replied.

“I think some reasonable citizens may disagree,” Saint-Marc said, to which Barnes replied, “Some might, but it’s less controversial than, say, a swastika.”

The city’s argument that the official flag of the nation of Israel is too controversial to fly, and suggesting that “reasonable citizens” would object, raised eyebrows.

“The City of Nashua’s terrifying argument demonstrates why free speech is so important,” said Institute for Free Speech attorney Nathan Ristuccia. “We cannot trust the government to decide whose views are too controversial to be permitted.”

Steve Bolton, Nashua’s long-time lead corporation counsel, tried to clean up the city’s position. He told NHJournal Barnes’ comments about Israel were part of a speculative argument that does not reflect the views of Mayor Jim Donchess or the Board of Aldermen.

“It was hypothetical, but that’s certainly not the position of the City of Nashua,” Bolton said.

Barnes was not in the office Wednesday and did not respond to requests for comment.

Israel is a United States ally and the only democracy in the Middle East. It’s also fighting a war against antisemitic terrorist organizations backed by Iran following the brutal Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack in which 1,300 people were murdered. 

For his part, Scalera does not understand how Nashua is deciding which flag to fly. He said he was told the city would not fly the Palestinian flag due to the ongoing war.

“The City of Nashua has not shied away from flying the flags of foreign nations, especially foreign nations involved in active conflict. For example, in the wake of Russia’s illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine, the City proudly raised the Ukrainian flag in solidarity with the people of Ukraine, as well as the Ukrainian population here in Nashua,” Scalera told NHJournal.

Scalera was also told by members of the Board of Alderman that Nashua would not allow a flag from a territory, like Palestine, that is not officially recognized as a nation.

“However, Nashua has also raised the flag of Kurdistan, which is at this point in time an autonomous region, and hopefully one day a nation-state, but nevertheless was not one at the time of the flag raising,” Scalera said.

Documents filed in the case show the city recently approved a day celebrating the Dominican Republic, which is currently accused of ethnic cleansing for its handling of Haitian refugees. The city also flew a Pride flag last year on orders from Donchess. However, a request for a pro-life flag to celebrate the overturning of the Roe vs. Wade decision was rejected.  

“Censorship,” said state Sen. Kevin Avard (R-Nashua) when asked about the case.

“It all boils down to whom the mayor and alderman of Nashua are comfortable offending and who they would rather not. The Pine Tree ‘Appeal to Heaven’ folks, or the Rainbow Flag-LBTQ community. It doesn’t sound like they want to hear from people of faith.”

And Rep. Judy Aron (R-Acworth), a Jewish member of the New Hampshire House and an outspoken defender of Israel, called the city’s actions “sad.”

“If the leaders of the City of Nashua can’t handle free speech, then perhaps the decision to end the traditional program is sad and disappointing but probably a good decision.”

Aron offered her own solution. “They should just fly a white flag of surrender.”

Hit with a free speech lawsuit for denying residents the ability to fly a historical, patriotic flag at City Hall, Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess seemingly retreated by repealing the public flag pole policy.

The repeal isn’t a white flag, the city’s attorneys insist. But lawyers for the residents who’ve brought the lawsuit say it’s a bait and switch to avoid legal peril.

Nashua resident Beth Scaer filed her lawsuit last month after the city refused to allow her to fly a Pine Tree Riot flag on City Hall’s “Citizen’s Flag Pole.” In its rejection statement, the city said the Pine Tree Flag, and a “Protect Women’s Sports” flag she attempted to fly previously, were “not in harmony with the message that the city wishes to express and endorse.”

After the lawsuit was filed, Donchess quietly ended the city’s long tradition of having a public flagpole, declaring that in the future, Nashua’s government would decide what flags would and wouldn’t fly and do so without community involvement.

But that repeal, done without any public input or approval from the city’s Board of Alderman, isn’t enough to get out of legal trouble, insists Scaer’s attorney, Nathan Ristuccia, with the Institute for Free Speech.

“This abrupt change is a transparent attempt to avoid judicial scrutiny, but it cannot moot the Scaers’ claim for injunctive relief,” Ristuccia said in a court filing this week.

Ristuccia said the repeal was simply cover for Nashua to engage in censorship by silencing the views of residents who do not walk in lock-step with the administration. But repealing the policy doesn’t fix anything, he wrote. In fact, Nashua and Donchess have said they don’t plan to stop controlling speech through City Hall, according to Ristuccia.

“If this Court does not grant relief, Defendant Donchess could restore the old policy just as easily as he repealed it. Indeed, a spokesman for Nashua has publicly ‘denied that the mayor had made any change to the cityʼs flagpole policy’ and stated that Donchess was ‘merely clarifying the existing policy,’” Ristuccia states in his motion.

Those statements were made to NHJournal by Steven A. Bolton, the city’s corporation counsel.

The existing policy for City Hall Plaza Events uses the same language as the now-repealed flag policy in order to control the message people are allowed to express, according to Ristuccia.

“Defendants use a City Hall Plaza Events policy that is almost identical to the 2022 flag policy … Ceremonies at the City Hall Plaza are permitted only if the ceremony’s message is ‘in harmony with city policies and messages that the city wishes to express and endorse’ and in ‘the City’s best interest,’” Ristuccia wrote.

The lawsuit stems from Scaer’s request to fly what is known as the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, featuring that phrase (from philosopher John Locke) and a pine tree. The pine tree is also a reference to the 1772 Pine Tree Riot, which took place in Weare, N.H., and is widely viewed as one of the first skirmishes in the American Revolution.

City officials denied the request, but they did not explain why they found the flag objectionable.

The Citizen Flag Pole in Nashua allowed any resident to apply for a permit to fly a flag at City Hall. Past flags have celebrated Pride Month, Indian Independence Day, Brazilian Independence Day, Greek Independence Day, International Francophonie Day, and the anniversary of the founding of Nashua’s Lions Club.

But Scaer says the city started censoring her in 2020 when her flag with the message “Save Women’s Sports” was removed after flying for one day due to complaints from City Councilor Jan Schmidt. In February, she was again denied when she sought to fly a flag supporting people who detransition after a sex change procedure. The denial stated the message was “not in harmony with the message that the City wishes to express and endorse.”

Appealing to Heaven may not be feasible in a First Amendment dispute, but a federal lawsuit could work.

A Nashua official’s decision to ban the historic Pine Tree flag from outside City Hall this summer is landing Mayor Jim Donchess’ administration in court. Attorneys with the Institute for Free Speech say the city’s abuse of its flagpole policy violates the First Amendment.

“Nashua’s flag policy gives city officials unbridled discretion to censor speech they dislike,” said Institute for Free Speech Attorney Nathan Ristuccia. “The First Amendment doesn’t permit the government to turn a longstanding public forum into a personal billboard for city officials’ preferred views. The Supreme Court has warned against exactly this abuse.”

The Institute for Free Speech is representing Nashua resident Beth Scaer in the lawsuit filed in the United States District Court in Concord. Scaer applied to fly a Pine Tree flag from the city’s flagpole in June, but was denied.

“It’s disturbing that Nashua officials can arbitrarily silence voices they disagree with,” Scaer said. “The Pine Tree Flag represents an important part of our local history, yet the city wouldn’t allow it to fly because it’s somehow not ‘in harmony’ with their message. But this isn’t about one flag—it’s about protecting everyone’s right to free speech.”

The complaint points out that the city maintains a “Citizen Flag Pole” in front of city hall for people “to fly a flag in support of cultural heritage, [to] observe an anniversary, honor a special accomplishment, or support a worthy cause.” Those causes have included Pride Month, Indian Independence Day, Brazilian Independence Day, Greek Independence Day, International Francophonie Day, and the anniversary of the founding of Nashua’s Lions Club, according to court records.

Scaer herself used the flagpole to fly flags celebrating Martin Luther, Women’s Suffrage, and Christianity. But she started running into trouble in 2020 when her flag with the message “Save Women’s Sports” was removed after one day when City Councilor Jan Schmidt complained.

At the time of the 2020 incident, Nashua had no written policy on flag approval. But a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling concerning a citizen’s flag controversy in Boston prompted Nashua to draft one.

The Nashua policy states, “This potential use of a City flag pole is not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public. Any message sought to be permitted will be allowed only if it is in harmony with city policies and messages that the city wishes to express and endorse.”

The Institute for Free Speech says that’s not good enough. The net effect is viewpoint censorship, says Mat Staver, founder and chairman of the nonprofit, pro-faith legal group Liberty Counsel. He should know. His organization filed the lawsuit that resulted in the Supreme Court ruling Nashua is accused of violating.

When the City of Boston banned conservative activist Hal Shurtleff from flying the Christian flag, with its white banner and red cross on a blue field, at Boston City Hall in 2017, Staver and Liberty Counsel took the city to court. They eventually won a $2.1 million award and set a legal standard at the U.S. Supreme Court he says Nashua is now failing.

“They’re clearly violating the citizens’ right to free speech, and if they don’t reverse themselves they are subject to a lawsuit. It will be expensive for the city,” Staver told NHJournal.

Scaer’s February application to fly a flag supporting people who detransition after a sex change procedure was denied this year as it was deemed “not in harmony with the message that the City wishes to express and endorse.”

Undeterred, Scaer sought permission to fly a Pine Tree flag around the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, in part to honor Granite Staters who fought in the battle. A version of the Pine Tree flag is believed to have flown at that battle.

In particular, Scaer wanted to fly what is known as the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, featuring that phrase (from philosopher John Locke) and a pine tree. The pine tree is also a reference to the 1772 Pine Tree Riot, which took place in Weare, N.H., and is widely viewed as one of the first skirmishes in the American Revolution.

But city officials denied the request, stating the flag celebrating Revolutionary War patriots was also not in harmony with the Donchess administration’s vision. The city did not explain why it found the flag objectionable.

The Pine Tree flag made news earlier this year when it was reported conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito flew it at his New Jersey vacation home. The flag was also brandished by a handful of people in the violent mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The prevailing media narrative then linked Alito to the flag and to the Jan. 6 attack, with barely a mention of the flag’s true origin.

NOTE: An earlier version of this story mistakenly reported Liberty Counsel attempted to fly the Christian Flag in Boston. It was Hal Shurtleff and Camp Constitution, who were later represented by Liberty Counsel. NHJournal regrets the error.