
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: MONDAY, June 11, 1990                   TAG: 9006110198
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-6   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

KLAN'S HOODS

GEORGIA JUDGE Howard E. Cook holds a strange view of civil-rights history, not to mention present-day mores. The Ku Klux Klan, he said, is "a persecuted group" whose members need to hide their faces.

Where the law is concerned, however, he's on sounder ground in saying it's unconstitutional to forbid wearing masks in public.

Cook's recent ruling affects only Georgia's law, but the case seems sure to reach the U.S. Supreme Court. That could cause several other states, including Virginia, to re-examine their own statutes.

The Georgia law, passed in 1952, was aimed at the Klan. There has never been any doubt of that. Its purpose, entirely laudable, was to deter the hooded order from terrorizing others. The Klan's notorious exploits, including lynchings, had been carried out by people in white robes whose hoods concealed their identity.

The Klan's more peaceful activities, such as marches, were also conducted with faces hidden and were meant to convey a threat. Hoods or masks came to be identified with crime and vigilantism. To discourage such outlaw actions, Georgia banned the wearing of masks in public except for such innocuous or appropriate coverings as holiday costumes, sportswear or occupational face gear. Virginia has a similar law.

It is evident, however, that nothing is inherently criminal about hiding one's face. The problem lies in doing so while one is harming other persons or their property.

Concealing one's identity can be perfectly legitimate. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which fought the bigotry exemplified by the Klan, resisted efforts to make the names of its members public during the civil-rights struggle, lest they become targets of retaliation.

And concealing one's identity can be linked with political statement. Should a Chinese student in the United States, marching to demonstrate against his country's repression, be compelled to reveal his face?

In contrast, most Americans find the Ku Klux Klan's values repugnant. That does not, as Judge Cook finds, make them a persecuted group. But our system is supposed to foster acceptance for the thought we hate. If one way the Klan expresses its views is to wear hoods on its uniform-like robes, should that choice be denied?

One cannot predict with certainty what the high court might hold. But no one should be shocked if it decides that the wearing of masks in public, like the burning of American flags, is an expression of opinion protected by the free-speech clause of the Constitution.

by CNB