Cross burning, the terrorism of choice for the Ku Klux Klan, was used to intimidate blacks in the post-Reconstruction South, and keep them politically impotent.

Although the influence of the Klan has waned, cross burnings still are undeniably meant to engender fear. The U.S. Supreme Court Monday, in a 6-3 decision, upheld a Virginia law that makes it illegal to burn crosses if the intent is to intimidate victims. Although there is scant free-speech value in cross-burning, based on its horrific history in this country, the court allowed that cross-burning might not always be used for purposes of intimidation and left the issue of intent for local courts to decide.

A dissenting Justice Clarence Thomas eloquently wrote in separate opinion: "A conclusion that the statute prohibiting cross burning with intent to intimidate sweeps beyond a prohibition on certain conduct into the zone of expression overlooks not only the words of the statute, but also reality. ... In our culture, cross burning has almost invariably meant lawlessness and understandably instills in its victims a well-grounded fear of physical violence."

Three men challenged the 1952 cross-burning law that convicted them.

In one case, Klansman Barry Black was arrested and fined $2,500 after presiding over a 1998 rally at which a cross was burned. One witness reported that some participants encouraged random shooting of blacks and lashed out at Mexicans. In the other case, also from 1998, Richard Elliot and Jonathan O'Mara, who are white, were sentenced to 90 days in jail after they attempted to burn a cross in the yard of their black neighbor, James Jubilee, in Virginia Beach, Va.

For the Elliots, O'Maras and Blacks of the world, the ruling is sound, while protecting the free speech rights of those rare souls somewhere who think up other reasons to burn crosses.