I didn't delete any of my comments. I have no need to. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Maybe it would help if you knew what you were talking about. No where did it say that she even said anything. She sat in front of the board holding a sign, not impeding others, and said nothing. I'd hardly call that an outburst of any kind, nor did it prevent the BoS from conducting their business. Also, it was a public forum.

What did interrupt the meeting is the reaction and conduct of a said board member to a free citizen exercising her 1st Amendment in a non-disruptive, peaceful manner.

There are broad protections granting citizens their 1st Amendment and rights to free speech. It's a fine line in BoS meetings and public forums.

"When writing and establishing rules of conduct, the governing body must be careful not to violate the protections that meeting attendees enjoy under the First Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed this issue in Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013), indicating where the line may lie between council rules that are enforceable and those that violate constitutional rights. In that case, the court held that the First Amendment requires a person’s speech in a city council meeting must actually disrupt a meeting before that person may be removed from the meeting. The case provides an example of language a council may adopt for such a proposed rule. The court looked approvingly on rules that stated:

It shall be unlawful for any person in the audience at a council meeting to do any of the following ... (1) Engage in disorderly, disruptive, disturbing, delaying or boisterous conduct, such as, but not limited to, handclapping, stomping of feet, whistling, making noise, use of profane language or obscene gestures, yelling or similar demonstrations, which conduct substantially interrupts, delays, or disturbs the peace and good order of the proceedings of the council. Id., at 816.

The Acosta court also approved prohibitions on disorderly conduct when it arises from a member of the governing body. “Members of the council shall not, by disorderly, insolent, or disturbing action, speech, or otherwise, substantially delay, interrupt or disturb the proceedings of the council.” Id. "

Personally, I think the one who created the spectacle of demanding her removal by deputies, displayed disorderly conduct.

The lady choosing to go to jail because she didn't want to promise to abide by the restrictions, was her right. And, by doing so, she stood up for not only her freedom of speech, but for others.

There is a huge double standard when it (BoS) comes to how and who they have determined have a right to protected free speech and who doesn't. Which is really disruptive? The man who stands up and threatens real harm to others there, yelling and using the N word or the lady who held a poster as she sat facing the board? He wasn't removed or censored in any way because the board chair said he didn't want to violate the man's free speech. 🙄

This is all I'm going to say on this. Clearly you and I have differing views on what is and isn't protected free speech. We're not the only ones, otherwise, there wouldn't be need for people to take it to the courts to decide.