On The Front Lines
Rutherford Institute President Commends University of Virginia on Decision to Lift Sign Ban at Athletic Events, Affirm Free Speech
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. -- John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, commended the University of Virginia on its decision to repeal a policy prohibiting signs, banners and flags in all UVA athletics venues. The announcement by Athletics Director Craig Littlepage came in the wake of widespread complaints and protests over the University's August 2008 decision to ban signs at all athletic events, including creative attempts by students to protest the ban. In fact, prior to UVA's decision to repeal its sign ban, students at the University had begun staging a series of protests, including a plan to wear blue instead of orange, the school color, to an upcoming game.
"All those who have engaged in staging creative protests should be encouraged and also commended for their efforts," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "This is a timely reminder of the power of the people to speak out and bring about change."
The University of Virginia's decision to ban all signs at athletic events came on the heels of an incident a year earlier when a UVA student was reportedly threatened with ejection from a football game for holding up a homemade sign suggesting that the head football coach be fired. A school official informed the student that his sign violated a policy banning any signs, flags or banner that contain "derogatory comments, profanity, impede another guest's view of the field or cover any stadium signage." Although a University spokesperson insisted that the sign ban was intended to "support and promote sportsmanship in a positive game-day environment for all fans in attendance," it resulted in an outcry from UVA students and civil liberties groups alike. Some critics were particularly outraged that the University founded by Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and a champion of free speech, should choose to stifle expression in such a manner.
"Clearly, the University's censorship of signs at athletic events violated the right to free speech found in the First Amendment," remarked Whitehead. "In fact, The Rutherford Institute successfully litigated two First Amendment cases where courts held that such bans at public stadiums violated the First Amendment."
The first case, Stewart v. D.C. Armory Board, challenged the exclusion of a "John 3:16" sign from a Redskin football games at R.F.K. Stadium. The stadium had a policy permitting only "event-related" signs that were not commercial, vulgar or derogatory, and which did not exceed 4 feet by 6 feet. The district court held that the stadium was a public forum and that the policy was overbroad and vague. In Aubrey v. Cincinnati Reds, the district court declared that a sign and banner policy adopted by the Cincinnati Reds was unconstitutionally vague in violation of the First Amendment.
