Constitutional freedoms should remain valid in NCAA stadiums
By Michael Robinson, Associate Sports Editor
The United States Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” However, Maryland Assistant Attorney General John Anderson recently concluded that the Constitution does not prevent efforts to limit offensive speech in college basketball stadiums.
The Associated Press reports Anderson stated in a memo that the University of Maryland can legally restrict offensive chants and signs during basketball games without violating the First Amendment.
In this memo, Anderson declares that the University of Maryland may “constitutionally adopt a carefully drafted policy that prohibits offensive speech at Comcast [Center]. I do not conclude that the First Amendment condemns any such effort to failure.”
In other words, Anderson believes the University of Maryland can restrict the speech of fans without abridging their freedom of speech. How can that be?
Are college basketball fans governed by different laws than other American citizens? Does the Constitution somehow change during NCAA basketball games?
Unless there is a college basketball stadium clause in the Constitution, I fail to understand how restriction of offensive speech in a basketball stadium differs from restriction of speech elsewhere in the country.
I do not pretend to understand the words of the Constitution more authoritatively than Maryland’s Assistant Attorney General, but I maintain that Anderson’s comments appear to contradict the freedoms stated in the First Amendment.
Anderson’s statements, however, do not introduce a new phenomenon. They simply take the concept of limiting distasteful conduct at NCAA events to a new level.
Many universities around the country have taken steps to limit offensive behavior at sporting events. At the University of Wisconsin, the marching band has stopped playing many traditional Badger anthems during men’s basketball games in an attempt to limit offensive language, and Kohl Center ushers regularly confiscate offensive signs from fans.
But UW officials have not asked the attorney general for an opinion on the constitutionality of prohibiting offensive speech at the Kohl Center because such a question is simply absurd. Why would freedom of speech laws apply differently in a college basketball arena than at any other venue?
Regardless of where a comment is made, our country has a proud history of protecting an individual’s right to speak his mind no matter how offensive his words may be to others.
If our Constitution allows people like Jerry Falwell to publicly declare that “the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians” helped cause the 9/11 tragedy because their actions anger God, how can we prohibit a college basketball fan from voicing his opinion regarding the opposing team or the referee?
If our Constitution allows groups like the Ku Klux Klan to assemble and freely voice its opinions, how can the University of Maryland deny that right to college basketball fans when they assemble at the Comcast Center? Does Anderson honestly feel that the offensive chants of Terrapins fans are more dangerous than those of the Klan?
How did this even become an issue to consider? Do people like Anderson really think that taunting at NCAA sporting events poses a serious threat to our universities?
What is the University of Maryland trying to protect people from? Curse words? Sarcastic recitations of a player’s name? Obnoxious comb-over jokes?
Is it really worth infringing on the Constitutional freedoms of thousands of college students just to prevent a few eight-year-olds from hearing that the player who threw an errant pass “f-cked up” or that the guy in the Ohio State shirt is an “asshole”.
If the Grateful Red instead chanted “you messed up” or called the Ohio State fan a “perfectly reasonable fellow exercising his right to support the team of his choice”, would our university really become a better place to learn? Would our nation’s educational system somehow benefit if the traditional “Hey” chant was no longer followed by “you suck”?
If the leaders of our country truly believe that offensive language in NCAA arenas is a pressing concern, they should take a look at the language regularly used in movies, music and television programs. If our nation’s youth can survive exposure to the likes of the Insane Clown Posse, who dropped the F-bomb 93 times in a single song, I don’t think an occasional “F-ck Ohio State” chant will have much effect on our nation’s moral character.
However, if the powers that be truly believe that children attending NCAA basketball games will be emotionally scarred by the chants of the student section, I encourage them to propose a constitutional amendment declaring that the freedom of speech guaranteed in the First Amendment does not apply inside college basketball arenas. If there is sufficient support to write such an amendment into law, I will gladly abide by its provisions. However, I will not sacrifice my constitutional freedoms to men like Anderson, who prefer to simply pretend that such an amendment already exists.
