Page 34 - November Banner 2017_Neat

Page 34 November 2017
by James Rada, Jr.
Thurmont Forced to Allow KKK
to March Through Town
On May 27, 1988, the Maryland
Invisible Empire of the Knights of
the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) applied
for a parade permit in Thurmont to
be held in August. The KKK said
the parade was to support the “Just
Say No to Drugs” campaign and the
AARP. However, it was also being
held to recruit new members with
the slogan “Save Our Land, Join the
Klan.” The parade would be made
up of no more than one hundred
members, one float, and a few
vehicles.
The Thurmont Commissioners
denied the permit.
The Maryland State Police had
already approved the Klan’s special
event permit. It had also been
submitted to the Maryland State
Highway Administration (SHA). SHA
would not recommend it without the
approval of Thurmont’s police chief,
who would only approve it with the
support of the commissioners.
Although commissioner approval
was not required in the town
ordinance, a process had developed
that the town evaluated any parade
applicants in Thurmont and
approved or denied applications. In
the case of the Klan’s parade, the
commissioners rejected the permit
because according to a KKK lawsuit
against the town:
• “They did not want to set a
precedent where many other
The Catoctin Banner Newspaper
1988
groups could request to hold
parades in Thurmont”;
• “The parade would require the
use of all of the Town’s police
officers and would require time
and a half to be paid to these
officers”;
• “Concern for the safety and
welfare of citizens as well as of
the KKK members”; and
• “Another group, Moore’s
Business Forms, would be
holding a large event on the
same day.”
The Klan tried again in August
for a September parade. This time,
the commissioners reserved judgment
and scheduled a public hearing.
“Sometime between June 8, 1988,
and August 24, 1988, the NAACP
informed counsel for the Town of
Thurmont that they considered that
case law of this Court prohibited
the Town of Thurmont from
granting permission for the KKK’s
proposed parade, unless black and/
or nongentile persons were allowed
to march in that parade. The NAACP
informed Town counsel that they
would sue the Town if it granted
permission without imposing a
nondiscrimination condition,” the
Klan’s U. S. District Court lawsuit
notes.
During the public hearing, the
American Civil Liberties Union
appeared on behalf of the Klan. The
commissioners asked questions of
Grand Dragon Roger Kelly, trying to
figure out what conditions they could
impose on the Klan. The ACLU
counseled Kelly not to answer many
of the questions and asked for a
permit free of conditions.
Not surprisingly, many of the
public commenting spoke out against
having the Klan march through
town.
The commissioners took only ten
minutes to decide to deny the permit
again. This time, the reasons given,
according to the lawsuit, were:
• “We don’t know who we are
giving this permit to. Granted
www.TheCatoctinBanner.com
Mr. Roger Kelly has signed
it. We have asked various
questions as to who the Klan
is, and we have not gotten
answers. Who is responsible
for damages that may be
incurred by the town, for
anyone along the parade
route?”;
• “The town facilities and
resources are being provided to
an organization that appears
to be discriminatory to races
other than the white race, and
also appears to be antisemitic
and discriminate against other
religions.”; and
• “You have indicated you
will not provide insurance
coverage or any hold harmless
agreement or reimbursement
of expenses in assisting you
with a parade in this town
apparently meaning claiming
no responsibility.”
The court case looked at
whether the town procedure for
considering parade applications was
constitutional, whether the town
could impose financial conditions
on the KKK for granting the permit,
and whether Thurmont could make
nondiscrimination a condition of
granting the permit.
The court found that the town
treated the granting of permits for
other parades in town differently.
They were not subject to public
hearings, questions about their
intent, or financial conditions.
Also, the court found that the
commissioners were free to impose
any conditions that they chose.
The court found that “Although
no official permit is issued, the
permission system of the Town
operates as a prior restraint on free
speech. If a group paraded without
permission, the Town deems that it
would have cause to arrest them.”
The town needed to have policy
guidelines that it followed for each
applicant.
The court found that some of
the financial conditions that the
town had tried to impose on the
Klan were not actually needed.
It was also found that the town’s
insurance actually covered parade
activity.
It was admitted in court that
the Klan’s activities in Thurmont
and Frederick County in the past
had been peaceful. The town had
even held a “walk-through” in
Thurmont on September 3, when
the members strolled through town
in their robes without incident. The
town position was that some of the
Published by www.EPlusPromotes.com
spectators could be violent, but this
was found to be a Constitutionally
impermissible consideration.
Although the town could ask the
Klan to have insurance, it would
have to be something in a written
policy and asked of all parade
applicants. However, the request to
ask for reimbursement for police
protection and clean-up was found
to be unconstitutional to impose
on parties who are exercising their
freedom of expression.
As for requiring the parade to
be non-discriminatory, the court
struggled with this issue. “It is
clear that the Town must open its
sidewalks to persons of all races
and religions as spectators at the
parade. The question here, however,
is whether the Town may open up
the parade itself to participants of
all races and religions, where the
KKK has requested a parade for
only “card-carrying members” of
the KKK, which consists only of
white Christians,” the court found.
The court found that the streets
of Thurmont were a public forum
and that granting the permit did
not amount to government support
of discrimination. “If the Town’s
procedure gives the appearance
of approval or disapproval of
groups, it is the Town’s own
fault for having in place an
unconstitutionally vague permission
procedure whereby applicants
must plead their individual cases
at town meetings, after which the
Commissioners announce their
votes and reasons therefore,” the
court found.
In issuing their decision, the
judges made a point of writing
that they felt “repugnance” at the
Klan’s beliefs, but “if these civil
rights are to remain vital for all,
they must protect not only those
society deems acceptable, but also
those whose ideas it quite justifiably
rejects and despises,” the court
found.
Following the decision, the town
issued a statement that read, in
part, “It deeply pains us that this
court’s order compels the town to
support this activity by providing
public streets, police protection,
clean-up and other assistance at
taxpayer’s expense.”
The Klan finally held its parade
on January 16, and it became
a protest of the Martin Luther
King, Jr. holiday, according to the
Frederick Post. “The event went
off without any major problems,
although a few shouting matches
erupted between klansmen and
bystanders,” the newspaper
reported.