Plum Island homeowners challenge July 4 flag warning

Pacific Legal Foundation is pressing the Town of Newbury, Massachusetts, to explain why residents could face liability for flying American flags and patriotic banners on their own property near protected habitat. The dispute comes less than two weeks before the nation’s 250th birthday and raises questions about property rights, free speech and how far endangered species laws can reach.

Why it matters: - The dispute puts Fourth of July celebrations and private property rights in conflict with local enforcement tied to endangered species protections. - The warning could affect Plum Island homeowners who want to display American flags and patriotic decorations on their own land. - The challenge raises First and Fifth Amendment concerns, according to Pacific Legal Foundation.

What happened: - Homeowners on Plum Island, including Marc Sarkady, received letters from the Town of Newbury warning that American flags and patriotic banners on private property could violate state and federal endangered species law. - Pacific Legal Foundation sent a letter this week demanding that the town clarify whether residents face legal liability for Independence Day displays on their own land. - The notice came less than two weeks before the nation’s 250th birthday.

The details: - The town identified flags, mylar streamers and reflective materials as potential violations under the Massachusetts and federal Endangered Species Acts. - The town said those items could discourage Piping Plovers and Least Terns from using habitat on Plum Island’s beach and dune system. - PLF argues that no court has ever found a homeowner liable under either law for displaying decorative items on private property. - PLF is asking the town to identify the legal authority for its position. - PLF says Americans living near protected habitat still have the right to use and enjoy their land and to speak freely. - Mark Miller, director of Environment and Natural Resources Litigation at Pacific Legal Foundation, called the warning inconsistent with the First and Fifth Amendments. - Miller also invoked a quote attributed to John Adams: “property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.” - Pacific Legal Foundation represents Marc Sarkady free of charge.

Between the lines: - The case shows how environmental restrictions can spill into everyday expressions of patriotism when protected species habitat is nearby. - PLF is framing the town’s warning as an overreach that turns ordinary holiday decorations into potential legal risk. - The town’s position suggests local officials may be trying to limit visual disturbances near nesting areas, even on private property.

What’s next: - PLF is seeking a clarification from the Town of Newbury on whether homeowners can be held liable for flying flags or displaying patriotic decorations. - The dispute could escalate if the town does not back away from its warning or provide a legal basis for it. - The issue may remain active as July 4 approaches and residents decide how to decorate their properties.

The bottom line: - The fight is about more than flags. It tests how far environmental law can reach onto private land during a national holiday.