University of Maryland Faces Scrutiny Over Security Fees for Turning Point USA Speaker Event

The University of Maryland (UMD) has been informed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) that its imposition of security fees on the university’s Turning Point USA (TPUSA) chapter for an upcoming speaker event may violate the organization’s First Amendment rights. The dispute centers on a requirement for TPUSA to pay for third-party security services for a one-hour talk by The Daily Wire senior editor Cabot Phillips, scheduled for October 22, 2025, in a classroom with a 40-person capacity.

FIRE, a nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to defending free speech, argues that universities cannot impose financial burdens on student groups based on anticipated reactions to their speakers. The organization contends that charging TPUSA for security, when similar events have not incurred such costs, amounts to a “heckler’s veto,” allowing potential disruptions to silence invited speakers. According to correspondence from FIRE, the University of Maryland Police Department initially informed TPUSA that external security personnel from Contemporary Services Corporation (CSC) would be required for screening at the event, with an estimated cost of approximately $150, including a four-hour minimum charge, despite the event’s short duration.

The university, in its response, stated that security fees for events are determined by content and viewpoint-neutral criteria and that all event hosts are responsible for these costs. However, UMD also acknowledged an unwritten policy that waives security costs for events held in certain designated outdoor spaces, where the university absorbs these expenses. FIRE has requested clarification of UMD’s event security fee policies, particularly regarding when student groups are obligated to cover such costs.

UMD maintains that the security measures for the TPUSA event are reasonable and standard for similar gatherings, citing a list of other student and university-affiliated events that have incurred similar third-party security costs. The university’s police department indicated that security assessments have been heightened for TPUSA events following a recent assassination of the organization’s former national field director. However, UMD asserts that this assessment is part of a broader review of security risks in the current climate and is not solely targeted at TPUSA’s viewpoints.

In its communication, FIRE highlighted that UMD’s actions appear to contradict its own policies, which explicitly state that the university may not consider the content or viewpoints of speech when determining security fees. FIRE pointed to previous TPUSA events on campus, including a vigil and a tabling event, which did not incur additional security charges. Furthermore, FIRE cited a recent vigil held by the UMD Students Supporting Israel chapter, which received substantial security support, including external security personnel and drone surveillance, at no cost to the student group. FIRE argues that the university’s imposition of security fees on TPUSA because of its perceived likelihood of attracting protest or threats is an impermissible “tax” on speech.

The university’s legal counsel, in response, clarified that the security fee requirement for the TPUSA event is based on content-neutral factors, including the type of event, anticipated attendees, venue, and historical data of similar events. The university stated that the total cost for CSC services is less than $150, and UMD officers are providing their presence at no charge. The university also noted that TPUSA had previously agreed to a “no/clear bag policy” and inquired about bag checks, which led to the requirement for CSC screening. Furthermore, the university differentiated between indoor event spaces, where hosts are typically charged for security, and designated outdoor “limited public forums” where security costs are often absorbed by the university. The university stated that TPUSA had previously paid security costs for an indoor event last year.

FIRE’s advocacy stems from the principle that public universities, bound by the First Amendment, should not allow anticipated audience hostility or potential for protest to dictate security costs for speakers. Such practices, FIRE argues, can effectively silence unpopular viewpoints by making them financially prohibitive.

University of Maryland did not respond to our request for comment.

Associated documents for this story are available in our Public Information Archive.

Article by Ken Buckler, based upon information from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the University of Maryland.

---