When I went to a Major League Soccer game a few weeks ago at D.C. United’s Audi Stadium, fireworks were shot off, and fans unleashed a torrential rain of beer into the air when the home team scored. It was all in good fun. Apparently, under new MLS rules, this kind of raucous behavior will be permitted — but fans’ simple political messaging will not.
As reported by Yahoo! Sports, the latest MLS fan code of conduct now includes a ban on “political language,” whatever that means.
“The prohibition on political signage is in place to support the overwhelming majority of MLS fans who come to our stadiums to enjoy a great soccer game,” MLS president Mark Abbott told Yahoo!. “All of our fans and supporters are important to us and we will continue to engage with them to ensure that we deliver an incredible experience for all.”
The motivation behind these rules is, at its core, understandable. After all, many sports fans fondly reminiscence about the days when NFL games and soccer matches weren’t consumed by which players stand for the anthem and which players kneel, and fans didn’t as frequently protest Trump or the hot news issue of the day.
But the solution to over-politicization of sports isn’t cracking down on fan speech.
For one thing, people have a fundamental right to be heard, and while MLS may be within their legal rights to restrict speech at matches, it’s almost never morally acceptable to squash voices just for saying things you don’t like. Plus, this ban may backfire, and just end up calling more attention to political stunts and messages in the first place.
Yet here’s the biggest problem: Who gets to decide what constitutes “political speech?”
As Yahoo!’s Caitlin Muray noted, “Is denouncing racism or fascism political? What about waving a gay pride flag, or an American flag? How about hosting a military appreciation night? What about hanging a banner with a historical anti-Nazi symbol?”
The league will have to draw the line somewhere, and their decision will inevitably squash uncontroversial speech and lead to political bias. Here’s what Yahoo reported:
Let’s translate this: Left-leaning advocacy, as long as it’s not explicitly endorsing Democrats or a campaign, will probably end up allowed. Whether it’s flying a gay pride flag, waving a sign that says “Love Trumps Hate,” or what have you, the sad reality in 2019 is that liberal rhetoric almost always invokes “denouncing racism, fascism or homophobia” in pursuit of their everyday political agenda. So these rules leave space for left-wing speech, especially given that the league will likely fear getting canceled by #resistance activists.
The Supreme Court knows this issue well. In a case involving Minnesota’s restrictions on political speech at polling places, Chief Justice Roberts laid this reality bare. As reported by the Washington Post, Roberts explained the riddles government lawyers couldn’t answer:
This is the same exact broken logic applied in the MLS’s new rules, albeit it in a non-governmental setting.
It’s clear the MLS’s so-called ban on political speech could just end up mostly silencing conservatives, or patriotic, pro-America displays. After all this is already happening, at least according to the AP, which reported that “earlier this season, a fan waving a Trump 2020 flag was removed from Providence Park.”
Plus, MLS players are allowed to make political statements. After all, Philadelphia Union captain Alejandro Bedoya recently grabbed a microphone mid-game and shouted “Hey, Congress, do something now! End gun violence! Let’s go!” I may disagree with the message, but Bedoya is well within his rights and did not face disciplinary action. Yet why shouldn’t fans have a chance to respond with signs or banners of their own?
It’s clear these new rules are deeply misguided. If we really want to discourage political acts in professional sports, we can’t regulate them out of existence — we should just stop paying attention to them at all.
