Questions of inequality in religious traditions are often approached through social, legal, or gender hierarchies. Yet religious communities also generate inequalities at the level of discourse, particularly in determining who is authorized to speak in the name of God. This paper examines such dynamics of discursive inequality in Zechariah 13:2-6, a text that depicts a striking scenario: prophetic activity is rejected, even violently suppressed by one's own family, and those accused of prophesying deny their prophetic identity in order to avoid punishment. Rather than interpreting this passage merely as a polemic against false prophecy, the paper argues that it reflects a deeper attempt to regulate access to prophetic speech within a community negotiating the limits of charismatic authority. The text thus raises a question of diachronic justice: what kind of justice governs a community in which those who have already spoken in God's name establish the conditions under which others may—or may not—speak after them? In this perspective, earlier claims to revelation function to restrict the possibility of subsequent prophetic voices, producing a form of discursive inequality grounded in temporal precedence. Finally, this study considers how interpretive traditions from the Second Temple period onward grappled with the unsettling implications of this passage. Early evidence from the history of reception suggests that the tensions generated by the restriction of prophetic speech often lead to the emergence of more plural configurations of authority, in which multiple mediations of divine discourse coexist—yet without fully resolving the question of equality in access to religious authority.