When openness becomes risk

We recently received a note from the communications director for one of Nebraska’s federal representatives asking that any press covering an upcoming in-state event keep the location and time private. The message explained that the gathering was intended for local leaders and media only, adding that recent events elsewhere had experienced disruptions.

We are not singling out which office sent the request, because quite frankly, it applies to all of them. This is not a new practice, and it is not limited to Nebraska or to members of Congress. Disruptions at public meetings have become a routine challenge for elected officials at nearly every level of government.

That reality was underscored Tuesday in Minneapolis, a city caught in a dangerous escalation of political violence, where Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) was attacked during a town hall meeting. According to police and multiple news reports, a man rushed the podium and sprayed an unknown liquid from a syringe before being tackled by security and arrested on suspicion of third-degree assault. Omar was not seriously injured and later said she would not be intimidated. Whatever one thinks of her politics or the investigations surrounding her, violence aimed at an elected official is a line that should concern everyone.

Unfortunately, this incident fits into a broader national pattern. Many Americans still recall the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) in Tucson, where six people were killed during what should have been a routine constituent meeting.

In 2017, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) was gravely wounded when a gunman opened fire on members of Congress practicing for a charity baseball game.

In 2022, a man was arrested near the home of Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh after allegedly traveling there with the intent to assassinate him. No shots were fired, but the episode shattered assumptions that even the judiciary was beyond reach.

At the state level, the trend has been even more sobering. In 2024, Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman (DFL-Minn.) and her husband were killed in what authorities described as a targeted political attack, reinforcing how thin the line has become between national rhetoric and local consequence.

Nebraska has largely been spared such extremes, but it has not been immune to rising tensions. In 2025, Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) faced a heavily disrupted town hall in Lincoln, where he sustained heckling and was repeatedly interrupted while discussing federal policy. No one was hurt, but the extensive media coverage illustrated how quickly constituent meetings can devolve into confrontation rather than dialogue.

Historically, Nebraska has also seen politically charged violence, from mob attacks on civic leaders during the Omaha Riot of 1919 to more recent threats against sitting federal officials, including a 2025 indictment of a Georgia man tied to threats against Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.).

We would like to believe Nebraska is the last place where political violence would take root, and so far that has largely held true. Still, the warning signs are difficult to ignore.

At the Gazette, we will always defend First Amendment rights and the principle of meaningful access to elected officials. We also recognize, with no small measure of regret, that access is being narrowed by circumstances largely beyond anyone’s control. Thomas Jefferson warned that “the doors of the temple of liberty ought to be open to all, and not shut upon the pretenses of danger,” a sentiment we continue to support. Yet the alternative — ignoring real threats and pretending conditions have not changed — risks something far worse: a retreat from public engagement altogether. Until the temperature cools, restraint may be the only way to ensure those doors can one day reopen.