Although we appreciate the motivation
– public safety – behind the Gilroy Garlic Festival
Association’s policy restricting the display of gang colors at its
yearly event, we believe the group and the City of Gilroy should
settle the lawsuit brought by the Top Hatters Motorcycle Club.
Although we appreciate the motivation – public safety – behind the Gilroy Garlic Festival Association’s policy restricting the display of gang colors at its yearly event, we believe the group and the City of Gilroy should settle the lawsuit brought by the Top Hatters Motorcycle Club.
Four Top Hatters were escorted from the annual stinking rose celebration in 2000 after they refused to remove their club jackets. The club members claim the festival’s policy and the enforcement of it by Gilroy police officers violated their constitutional rights to free association and free speech.
They’re right.
The problem with this type of policy is that there’s no clear place to draw the line. Why is it that motorcycle club jackets are over the line, but high school sweatshirts are acceptable? What about politically themed attire? It’s conceivable that a hemp-clad Earth First! member might be upset by someone sporting Rush Limbaugh signature wear. Then there’s clothing that touts one’s religious beliefs. Should the festival ban an orthodox Jew’s yarmulke, a fundamentalist Christian’s “what would Jesus do?” ball cap or a Muslim woman’s veil? Of course not.
And therein lies the problem. Thanks to the First Amendment, in America we have the right to express our ideas and opinions – even offensive opinions and incendiary ideas. We have the right to congregate with other like-minded folks, and yes, even form clubs whose members sport leather jackets.
For those whose last civics class was decades ago, let’s review the amendment’s text:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The First Amendment doesn’t grant permission to engage in criminal activity – which is what the Garlic Festival is trying to prevent with its gang colors policy – as part of the rights of free speech and association. But the Garlic Festival is trying to prevent crime the wrong way. Instead of spending time, money and energy fighting this lawsuit and trying to enforce a policy that’s questionable, those resources would be better spent on increased security and perhaps even more probation officer patrols.
The city and the festival organizers should be thankful the four Top Hatters who have filed this lawsuit are not seeking any punitive damages – just reimbursement for legal expenses and a policy change – which adds credence to the sincerity of their claim, in our view.
Especially in this post-Sept. 11 era, when everyone from the president to the attorney general to John Q. Citizen is reviewing the proper balance of public safety and personal freedom, let’s believe that we can have a safe Garlic Festival without banning the Top Hatters Motorcycle Club jackets.
The Gilroy Garlic Festival Association and the City of Gilroy should cut their losses now. We urge them to settle this lawsuit, amend the gang colors policy and view the entire episode as an object lesson on the wisdom and power of the First Amendment.
