Hours after a federal judge decided a University of Maryland student group that is critical of Israel can go ahead with a previously planned but canceled vigil on the anniversary of the Hamas attacks in Israel, Gov. Wes Moore said he believes it is “inappropriate” for such an event to take place on the anniversary.
Students for Justice in Palestine introduced the lawsuit in federal court last month when the university — facing public pressure and citing safety concerns — allowed and then reversed course on a vigil the group planned for Oct. 7. The group quickly celebrated the decision Tuesday, saying in a statement that it would “refuse to remain silent about war crimes” as it calls attention to Israel’s occupation in Gaza.
A university statement Tuesday said it would abide by the court’s decision and implement a “robust safety plan” for the day’s events, including a stronger security presence. The Democratic governor, hours later, said in a statement that he respects the legal process but he disagreed with the event in question.
Senior Judge Peter J. Messitte, in an opinion released after a hearing in the case Monday, said he agreed with the students’ arguments that their freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment were deprived and that the university “shall in no way prohibit or impede [the student group] from hosting its proposed vigil.”
The judge noted the backlash and “deep offense” that some pro-Israel groups would feel with public speech criticizing Israel on Oct. 7, the day last year when about 1,200 Israelis were killed and about 250 were taken hostage.
Still, he wrote, both sides see the date as “sacrosanct” and Students for Justice in Palestine would be harmed if it did not get a chance to express its views according to the university procedures it was already following.
“SJP appears to want to hold another peaceable, if highly controversial, event,” Messitte wrote. “But this is a matter of law, not of wounded feelings. Free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment may be the most important law this country has. In many ways, all other basic freedoms — freedom of religion, of the press, of the right to assemble, and to petition the government — depend upon it.”
Lawyers with Palestine Legal and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) who represented the students celebrated the ruling and said other higher education leaders across the country should take notice.
“Criticizing Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza is protected by the First Amendment, period.” Tori Porell, an attorney at Palestine Legal, said in a statement. “This ruling is not just a win for Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Maryland, but for all students speaking out for Palestinian freedom across the country.”
Students for Justice in Palestine, an active student group advocating for the end of violence in Gaza, said it planned the vigil in McKeldin Mall on campus in College Park to commemorate victims of the year of war.
But University President Darryll Pines wrote in a Sept. 1 letter that all on-campus events hosted by student organizations would be paused on Oct. 7 “out of an abundance of caution.”
He noted the emotional impact of the war and the anniversary of the attacks on the university community while referring to the immense public input the university received after first letting the Students for Justice in Palestine use the space on campus.
Jewish groups and others pressured the university to reject the event, including with online petitions that gathered thousands of signatures. Politicians on both sides of the aisle — like Democratic U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin and both the Democratic and Republican nominees running to replace him — similarly praised the university’s decision to revoke the event. Moore did not speak out at the time but said Tuesday night “Oct. 7 is an inappropriate date for such an event.”
“Terrorists target civilians, and that’s what Hamas did a year ago on Oct. 7,” Moore wrote. “And that’s what that day should be remembered as — a heinous terrorist attack on Israel that took innocent lives.”
The students’ lawyers asked a judge to reject the university’s “special rules” for Oct. 7 and reinstate permission to host the vigil.
In a filing opposing that motion, attorneys for the university said the “narrowly-tailored restriction” was in the best interest of students and public safety.
Though Pines, in his Sept. 1 letter, wrote there was “no immediate or active threat,” lawyers after the case was filed said the university in late August received “credible threats of violence” from individuals calling for the cancelation of the Students for Justice in Palestine event. Those included threats to Pines directly and a call to a university lawyer saying they intended to bring a gun to campus.
Pines requested a safety assessment and then worked with law enforcement before issuing the statement changing the rules for Oct. 7.
In a news conference after a hearing Monday, Gadeir Abbas, an attorney with the CAIR Legal Defense Fund pointed to Pines’ letter saying there were no active threats.
And Daniela Colombi, a member of the Students for Justice in Palestine, said the perceived threat was simply because the group’s members are Palestinian or are allies, and that’s not going to change one day versus another.
“It’s the school’s responsibility to protect us, not by erasing us from the campus but by dealing with those situations seriously,” Colombi said.
The attacks by Hamas in Israel last year and the subsequent violence in Gaza sparked intense campus protests in Maryland and across the country.
At the University of Maryland, the Students for Justice in Palestine has held more than 70 meetings, protests, demonstrations and other events on campus “without significant disruption or conflict,” the university argued in court. But the anniversary presented “safety and security challenges … of a different nature and degree than for any other event held over the past year,” they argued.
The judge in his opinion issued Tuesday wrote that the university has the right to increase security for the event, including, “to inquire of participants to identify themselves; to administer appropriate crowd-control measures and, in appropriate circumstances, to oust any individual from campus who is not in compliance with such reasonable crowd-control measures.”
The university, in its response after the opinion, indicated that it would move forward with some of those options as it proceeds “with care and caution.”
Got a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.
Originally Published: