University of Maryland Students for Justice in Palestine v. Board of Regents of the University System of Maryland, et al.

Summary

In September 2024, the University of Maryland chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), joined by Jewish Voice for Peace and represented by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Palestine Legal, filed a federal lawsuit against the University System of Maryland and UM President Darryll Pines. The suit challenged the university’s last-minute cancellation of a planned October 7 interfaith vigil commemorating Palestinian lives lost in Gaza. Although the event had initially been approved, university officials revoked permission and imposed a sweeping ban on all student-led “expressive events” that day, citing safety concerns and intense public pressure, including a petition with nearly 28,000 signatures. The plaintiffs argued this violated their First Amendment rights, amounting to viewpoint-based discrimination and unconstitutional prior restraint. They sought a preliminary injunction, a declaration of unconstitutionality, damages, and attorneys’ fees.

On October 1, 2024, a U.S. District Judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, issuing a preliminary injunction that blocked the university’s expressive event ban. The court found that the university’s justification—concerns over safety and possible disruptions—was insufficient to support a blanket restriction on speech, especially given the absence of an immediate threat and the availability of less restrictive alternatives. The court ordered the university to reinstate SJP’s reservation for McKeldin Mall, subject to conditions such as a $2,500 bond and enhanced safety measures. The university agreed to comply and worked with organizers to implement a crowd-control and security plan.

In July 2025, the parties reached a settlement. Under the agreement, the University of Maryland agreed to revise its event policies to ensure they are content-neutral and do not discriminate based on viewpoint. The university also committed to First Amendment training for relevant staff and paid a financial settlement that included damages and attorneys’ fees.

In early August 2025, the Maryland Board of Public Works officially approved the $100,000 settlement. The check will be paid by the state, meaning taxpayer dollars are ultimately funding the settlement. The state will issue a check to the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, which will then forward the funds to the plaintiffs’ attorney. This aspect of the settlement drew criticism from Maryland GOP lawmakers, who opposed using public funds for what they see as the legal defense of a controversial student group.