Klan’s Bid to ‘Adopt’ Highway Detoured

The Ku Klux Klan’s bid to officially “adopt a highway” near St. Louis will be weighed by the Justice Department before the Supreme Court takes up the issue.

The high court on Monday asked the government’s lawyers to say whether the nation’s civil rights laws would be violated by allowing a racist group to “adopt a highway” that was built with federal funds.

All but two states have such programs and they are credited with beautifying thousands of miles of roadway. Volunteers plant shrubs and clean up litter. In exchange, the state posts roadway signs acknowledging the contributions of the civic groups.

In an attempt to clean up their image, Klan leaders in several states have asked to join the program but have been rebuffed repeatedly. Last year, however, U.S. District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh in St. Louis ruled that the Klan had a free-speech right to participate in the state’s program on an equal basis.

Ironically, Missouri Klan leader Michael Cuffley had sued the state under the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, the post-Civil War era measure that allows persons to sue states when their constitutional rights are violated.

“The Klan believes in racial segregation and white supremacy,” the judge said, but “the Constitution of the United States protects [its] right to express that ideology as freely as one whose views society embraces. . . . [The state] cannot use its regulations to target the Klan’s unfortunate beliefs.” Judge Limbaugh is the uncle of radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the judge’s ruling but Missouri officials appealed the question to the Supreme Court during the summer. The state’s lawyers agree that Klan leaders are free to express their views but they argue that the racist group does not have a right to participate in a state program.

“We say they cannot participate because they have a history of violence and criminal behavior,” said Steve Forsythe, a spokesman for the state Department of Transportation.

Nonetheless, while the appeals are pending, the state has been forced to put up several signs on Interstate 55 near St. Louis that say: “Adopt a Highway. The Knights of Ku Klux Klan, Realm of Missouri.” Vandals removed the signs soon after they were erected.

Lawyers for California and 27 other states supported Missouri’s appeal in the case (Yarnell vs. Cuffley, 00-289). Defending the Klan, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union urged the court to reject the appeal. State programs should not be “closed to those who are at odds with the prevailing political orthodoxy,” Robert Herman said.

The justices discussed the case behind closed doors Friday and issued an order Monday asking the U.S. solicitor general to file a brief on the issue. That will delay a decision for several months.

Meanwhile, the court turned down a free-speech appeal filed on behalf of a Florida teenager who displayed a small Confederate battle flag at school. When the student, Wayne Denno, refused an assistant principal’s request to put away the flag, he was suspended. His mother sued the school board and the assistant principal but lost.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta said that students do not have the same free-speech rights as adults and that school officials have considerable leeway to set “the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior” on campus. The mother appealed to the high court, arguing that a student’s right to free expression should not be abridged so easily. But without comment, the court dismissed the case (Denno vs. School Board of Volusia County, 00-306).