Jan Flory Knowingly Voted Against the 1st Amendment


It’s not often that a sitting politician admits to violating the rights of the people but we’re seeing a lot of firsts here in Fullerton lately and the issue of ethics is no different.

Let us start by reminding the class that councilwoman Jan Flory is only currently on council because Ahmad Zahra sold out in record time and put her there. Despite Zahra’s peacocking and preening as a man of ethics and great concern for the Constitution and voting rights – he showed us early on that he’s an empty suit.

Now in an amusing twist of events it turns out that not only did Zahra and the council vote to kick our 1st Amendment rights in the teeth – his appointee Flory knew that what they were doing wasn’t going to hold up in the courts.

In a recent article [HERE] in the Voice of OC, Councilwoman Jan Flory said the following (emphasis added):

Councilwoman Jan Flory said while she respects the First Amendment, the privacy of city employees is also at stake. Like Whitaker, she said she couldn’t speak about the legal advice given to the Council during closed session.

I think that First Amendment rights trump everything else, but I believe that Kim Barlow has done a good job in that the city also wants to protect Mr. Ferguson’s First Amendment rights,” said Flory in a Nov. 8 phone interview.

She said the First Amendment isn’t the core issue.

“That’s not what’s at issue here. What’s at issue is he (Ferguson) obtained records that are private,” Flory said. “Or have some implications concerning the confidentiality of our city employees as well as members of the public.”

Flory also expected the publication gag order to get blocked, at least temporarily, she said.

“Was I shocked by it? No, not at all,” Flory said.

So Jan Flory, as a lawyer, expected the gag order to get blocked?

On what grounds could it possibly be blocked? On 1st Amendment grounds, perhaps?

Why? Because the gag order against publishing was and is an illegal prior restraint against the 1st Amendment and as a lawyer Jan Flory might be familiar with this particular point.

Now according to The Other Dick Jones™ at the last council meeting the entire council, Flory included, voted for this 1st Amendment violating gag order back in September despite Flory expecting it to be shot down.

There you have it folks.

Jan Flory “thinks that First Amendment rights trump everything else” but that didn’t stop her from voting to put the boot of government on the throat of OUR 1st Amendment rights when it suited the CYA needs of the city.

While fully expecting the courts to slap the city’s illegal SLAPP lawsuit/TRO – she voted against the 1st Amendment on 17 September 2019 and then did it again on 05 November 2019. I’m sorry Jan, but your postulating about the importance of the 1st Amendment is meaningless when you yourself voted against Freedom of the Press not once but twice.

You care about the 1st Amendment?


21 Replies to “Jan Flory Knowingly Voted Against the 1st Amendment”

  1. Flory was never much of a lawyer. But she was always a mean, vindictive hack. She was and still is, motivated by bitterness and arrogance toward the citizenry, and an inexplicable love of government bureaucrats.She’ll do ANYTHING to protect the incompetent. Remember the Poison Park, the illegal water tax, and the “balanced budget”?
    She lied about all of it.

  2. They really stepped in it this time. The public flogging of our council members will be as bad as 2011 if they continue.

    And I have no doubt they will continue.

  3. “the city also wants to protect Mr. Ferguson’s First Amendment rights,”

    Jesus that’s some wild double-speak out of the old witch’s pie hole. She plainly violated Ferguson’s First Amendment rights from the very beginning. That’s why the appeals court had to intervene.

  4. So Flory deliberately voted to support an untenable position knowing the taxpayers would have to pick up the tab?


  5. Lawyers and Politicians mindsets differ. Lawyers are experts in truth and politicians more about perception. Its understandable that a lawyers will almost intentionaly incriminate themselves

    1. Lawyers are experts in truth? Lawyers are experts in illusions, deception, mistruths and outright lies.

    1. Impressive credentials. “Western State Law School”. I’ve never heard of that Law School. Which Western State is it located in?

          1. You know, my master reads this blog on a regular basis. Please go easy on her. These comments about her edgamacation are upsetting her. Oh crap, out comes the old broom stick.

            WHACK! WHACK! CRACK-A-LACK ! ! !

            1. You are not me. I know me and you are not it. Among other things, I know how to use an apostrophe. Also, I have a doggie heaven halo. You do not.

              However, your imitation is dead-on. I always knew when to lay low ’cause of that damn broomstick: when the liquor cabinet was open.

  6. You are not me. I know me and you are not it. Among other things, I know how to use an apostrophe.

    However your imitation is dead-on. I always knew when to lay low ’cause of the broomstick: during cocktail hours.

  7. Jan, Jan you little bitch, Capable to hurt anyone, of course what can we expect from a person with no ethical morals that likes to play dirty pool, a person that makes deal with police officers to harm third persons that has nothing to do with you. Jan you are a very low person, no capable to play clean , let me tell you , “ What comes around, goes around. “
    You know exactly what you did ,
    How karma feels , that after years your son was in probation.?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *