FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Jas Chana, NCAC Communications Director

jas@ncac.org, 212-807-6222 ext.107

Free Speech, Artist Groups Condemn Decision to Remove Controversial Painting from
Student Art Exhibition in U.S. Capitol
New York, NY, 1/19/2017- The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) and close to a
dozen other organizations committed to defending free speech and the arts are condemning the
decision of the Architect of the Capitol to remove a student painting displayed on Capitol Hill
after it sparked controversy for its alleged anti-police message.
Last spring, David Pulphus, a St. Louis, MO high school student, was chosen as a winner in the
annual Congressional Art Competition for an allegorical painting depicting a scene of protest
against police violence. Together with the work of 400 other winners, Pulphus painting was
displayed in a public passageway leading to the U.S. Capitol building. The painting hung for six
months before conservative media stirred controversy over its depiction of police. Republican
lawmakers responded by removing the painting, without permission, from the passageway,
which prompted Representative Lacy Clay (D-MO), whose district the student artist came from,
to re-hang the painting each time it was removed. The Architect of the Capitol made the final
decision, siding with Republican representatives who argued the painting broke the art
competitions guidelines forbidding works that depict subjects of contemporary political
controversy
NCACs statement strongly condemns the removal of Pulphus painting, arguing that the art
competitions vaguely worded guidelines are being abused by representatives whose goal is
to silence a particular political viewpoint.
The statement, issued by NCAC, is co-signed by American Civil Liberties Union, American
Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia, American Society of Journalists and Authors,
Authors Guild, College Art Association, Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, Free Speech
Coalition, Index on Censorship, PEN America, Vera List Center for Art and Politics,
Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts.
At a time of nationwide concerns about the future of our free speech protections, this decision is
deeply disturbing, said NCACs Director of Programs Svetlana Mintcheva. We urge the
Architect of the Capitol to place the core national value of free speech over and above partisan
strife.
READ THE STATEMENT
###

ncac.org
The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) is an alliance of 50 national non-profit organizations
dedicated to defending freedom of thought, inquiry and expression.


Statement Condemning Removal of Police Protest Painting from Capitol Hill
As organizations devoted to promoting the arts and freedom of expression, we condemn
the recent removal of a student painting from a public passageway on Capitol Hill. The
removal shows a deep disregard of a young persons constitutional right to free
expression and is a flagrant violation of the principles underlying the nations
commitment to the protection of free speech. It is a sad day when elected representatives
of the people of the United States send a message to young people in this country that
they should stifle passionate expression concerning important issues of public policy.
The painting, by St. Louis High School Senior David Pulphus, is among the winners of
the annual Congressional Art Competition. It depicts, in an allegorical manner, a young
artists vision of one of the facts of our recent past: a protest against police violence.
Pulphus painting was selected through a process set by the Competition, which included
a review by the office of the Architect of the Capitol. It was approved and remained on
display for six months until conservative news outlets built up a controversy around it in
late December.
The media-generated controversy was followed by multiple attempts on the part of
several Republican Representatives to take down the work with their own hands (each
time, Representative Clay (D-Mo) put it back up). On Friday, January 13th, Stephen
Ayers, the Architect of the Capitol, ordered the paintings removal on the basis that it
violated competition guidelines stipulating that subjects of contemporary political
controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed.
The retroactive use of the very guidelines by which the painting was selected in the first
place to remove the work only serves to draw attention to the how vague these guidelines
are. Worse, the fact that the decision to censor the work was made under strong political
pressure coming from one side of the aisle proves how easy it is to use the vague
guidelines to suppress political viewpoints.
What is controversial is entirely subjective and thus open to abuse and the enforcement
of political bias: Indeed, many other artworks in the exhibition may be deemed
controversial, including a depiction of white police officers harassing an African
American playing checkers, a portrait of Bernie Sanders and another of President Obama.
And, of course, portraits and statuary on permanent display in Congressional buildings
represent many political figures that are controversial. That Pulphus painting of police
protests was singled out among all these for a hasty removal, after partisan political
pressure by representatives who claimed the work was offensive to law enforcement,
only deepens our concerns about the elected representatives enforcing political bias and
stifling speech.
Political artistic expression is protected speech, no matter how controversial or offensive
some may find it. Criticism of government actors such as law enforcement officials is one
of the foremost reasons why we have the First Amendment. Citizens freedom to speak
out against perceived governmental abuses and injustices is necessary to the health of our
democracy: were government able to silence such criticisms, meaningful political
discourse would be rendered impossible.


Removing the work sends a message to young people - and everybody else - that they
should not depict the world around them for fear of offending our political
representatives. At a time when we have a new administration and nationwide concerns
about free speech, the censoring of an artwork because of its viewpoint is a deeply
disturbing and divisive act in an already polarized nation.
We urge the Architect of the Capitol to take the time to consider arguments from both
sides of the aisle and make a decision that upholds one of the nations most cherished
values, a value that should not be subject to partisan strife: the value of free speech. We
hope that rather than exacerbating partisan conflict, the controversy around this young
persons painting becomes a unifying educational opportunity to reinforce free speech
principles across both sides of the aisle.

National Coalition Against Censorship

American Civil Liberties Union
American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia
American Society of Journalists and Authors
Authors Guild
College Art Association
Comic Book Legal Defense Fund
Free Speech Coalition
Index on Censorship
PEN America
Vera List Center for Art and Politics
Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts