Selling Off Constitutional Rights:

By Jeffrey Thomas Clay

When Judge Schulman issued his order in Town of Newmarket v. Clay, and the New Hampshire Supreme Court later stamped it as “well reasoned,” they didn’t just rule against one citizen. They opened the door for every resident in New Hampshire to bargain away their constitutional rights and their rights under RSA 91-A, the state’s Right-to-Know law.
According to this logic, public agencies are now free to cut deals with individuals: “We’ll pay you, but you must promise never to seek public records again.” What once was considered a cornerstone of democracy — transparency, accountability, and open access to government records — has suddenly been treated like a private commodity, to be bought, sold, or bartered away.

The Constitutional Right on the Auction Block

New Hampshire’s Constitution, Part I, Article 8, guarantees the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records. RSA 91-A reinforces that guarantee by requiring “the greatest possible public access” to public documents. These rights are not favors granted by government; they are mandates imposed upon government for the protection of the people.
Judge Schulman’s order — and the Supreme Court’s endorsement — flips this principle upside down. If enforced, citizens are no longer guardians of transparency; they are vendors. Their rights, once thought inalienable, can now be priced, packaged, and sold.

A Dangerous Precedent

If every citizen can sell their rights, then what stops a town, school district, or state agency from setting up a “buyout program” of transparency? Imagine:

• Want to silence criticism of a town council? Buy off vocal citizens with contracts waiving their Right-to-Know access.
• Want to hide controversial spending? Pay a settlement to anyone who might file a records request.
• Want to shield government from scrutiny? Just budget for silence.

The precedent invites abuse. Transparency becomes optional — available only to those who refuse the payout.

My Suggestion: Name Your Price

If this is truly the law of New Hampshire now, then every citizen should take advantage. I propose setting the price of your constitutional rights at ten thousand dollars each from every public agency you deal with. School district? $10,000. Town council? $10,000. State department? Another $10,000.
After all, if the courts have ruled that transparency is for sale, why sell cheaply?

Why This Matters

Of course, the suggestion is tongue-in-cheek — but the danger is real. By blessing Judge Schulman’s order, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has not only undermined public confidence but also invited a marketplace of secrecy. It means the government can spend taxpayer money to buy silence rather than serve the public.
This is foolishness of the highest order, and it betrays the spirit of both the New Hampshire Constitution and RSA 91-A. Rights are not meant to be traded; they are meant to be defended. If this precedent stands, the citizens of New Hampshire must decide: will they sell their rights for a price, or will they demand the courts correct this travesty and restore transparency to its rightful, non-negotiable place?