THE CASE

You are the mayor of Skokie, Ill., a community with a large Jewish population, including thousands of Holocaust survivors. Members of a political party with a history of divisive and discriminatory views want to stage a march in your town. In past public gatherings, the members of this party have worn uniforms that resemble the robes worn by the Ku Klux Klan (a hate group that promotes white supremacy) and armbands with swastikas, a symbol of the Nazi Party. The Nazi Party, led by Adolf Hitler, was responsible for the death of millions of Jews and members of other minority groups in the World War II Holocaust.

Although the party has said this march is about protesting new rules limiting political demonstrations in public parks, many members of your community suspect that it will also be used as an opportunity to promote the group’s anti-Semitic and anti-integration views and to intimidate local residents. The marchers argue that because they have given fair warning of when and where the march will take place (in addition to public announcements, they have advertised the planned gathering in the local newspaper) residents who are fearful can avoid the protest.

Community members are rallying together to try to stop this demonstration, which many see as similar to Nazi demonstrations against Jews during World War II because of the views being expressed and the display of swastikas. A local circuit court has ruled that the march cannot take place because of the real and significant potential that it will turn violent. But the party is appealing the ruling, and your community is looking to you for guidance on what to do next.

Should you allow this protest to proceed?