Maryland OKs restrictions on Terps vulgarity

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

University of Maryland officials can restrict the use of vulgar signs and chants by fans at campus sporting events, the state's attorney general has ruled.

The university may "constitutionally adopt a carefully drafted policy that prohibits offensive speech at Comcast [Center]," Assistant Attorney General John Anderson wrote in a four-page memo. "I do not conclude that the First Amendment condemns any such effort to failure."

The memo, dated March17, was obtained by The Washington Times yesterday.

George Cathcart, the university's director of communications, said school officials will meet with student groups over the next few months to devise a new code of conduct. The goal is to have a policy in place before the Terrapins' football opener at Byrd Stadium against Northern Illinois on Sept.4.

Mr. Cathcart labeled the ruling as "broad guidelines."

"We have not made any plans as to what we'll do and will let students drive whatever we do," Mr. Cathcart said. "We have now until football season to prepare."

Any policy devised by the school would not include criminal penalties, Mr. Anderson wrote, because "offensive speech" remains protected under the 1971 Supreme Court ruling Cohen v. California. In that case, a man wearing a T-shirt bearing a vulgar statement about the military draft was found not guilty of lewd, vulgar or profane conduct.

However, Mr. Anderson cited two cases in which restrictions on behavior were permitted in places involving "captive auditors," such as young children at games. Mr. Anderson also said the university could suffer financial harm or a damaged reputation from the behavior of its fans.

"This is a concern of the sensibilities of the public," Mr. Anderson said yesterday. "I don't think they should be subject [to profanity]."

Mr. Anderson said no policy should be implemented until other efforts "prove to be ineffective." The new standards also must pass a review court to ensure they are not excessive or "unacceptably vague." The policy must be well-publicized to ensure that ticket holders are aware of it and the school must provide an appeal system.