The Supreme Court today heard a new case weighing student groups' First Amendment rights of free speech, exercise of religion, and association against a school's right to control use of its facilities and to protect against discrimination on campus.
The case was brought by the Christian Legal Society (CLS) chapter at Hastings College of Law. Hastings had revoked CLS's status as a Registered Student Organization (RSO) after the CLS chapter adopted bylaws that required all voting members of the group to sign a "Statement of Faith" and pledge "to live their lives accordingly." Included in the Statement of Faith were promises to abstain from "acts of the sinful nature," including premarital sex and homosexual conduct.
As a consequence of not being an RSO, the CLS chapter would not receive funds from the school to reimburse members for trips, and members could not use campus office space, bulletin boards, and other resources. Though it could still ask for permission to use campus meeting rooms, it was not guaranteed access.
A majority of the time in the oral argument session was spent trying to figure out the exact policy used by the school. Hastings has a written non-discrimination policy that still would allow groups to exclude members based on their beliefs, but it also has an unwritten "all-comers" policy that requires RSOs to admit all students. At an early stage of the case, the CLS chapter seems to have agreed that the operative policy was the "all-comers" policy, but in filings and at oral argument today the lawyers for the CLS chapter tried to challenge both policies, forcing the Supreme Court Justices, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, to ask what, exactly, they were claiming in their suit.
The primary argument made by CLS's attorney, former federal judge Michael McConnell, was that the school could forbid groups that took discriminator action, but it could not refuse to recognize a group that chose its members based on beliefs. If all groups had to accept all beliefs, McConnell argued, that would require the campus Republican group to accept Democrats as voting members, for example. Justices were skeptical of this argument, and Justice Antonin Scalia noted that no one had presented any evidence that a group had ever been hijacked in this manner.
Additionally, the Justices seemed fairly unconcerned with the effects of being unrecognized. They noted that a group that was not an RSO could still meet on campus in public areas and was still free to communicate with students.
The case, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, will be decided before summer.
High Court Weighs Christian College Group's Right To Discriminate
The case was brought by the Christian Legal Society (CLS) chapter at Hastings College of Law. Hastings had revoked CLS's status as a Registered Student Organization (RSO) after the CLS chapter adopted bylaws that required all voting members of the group to sign a "Statement of Faith" and pledge "to live their lives accordingly." Included in the Statement of Faith were promises to abstain from "acts of the sinful nature," including premarital sex and homosexual conduct.
As a consequence of not being an RSO, the CLS chapter would not receive funds from the school to reimburse members for trips, and members could not use campus office space, bulletin boards, and other resources. Though it could still ask for permission to use campus meeting rooms, it was not guaranteed access.
A majority of the time in the oral argument session was spent trying to figure out the exact policy used by the school. Hastings has a written non-discrimination policy that still would allow groups to exclude members based on their beliefs, but it also has an unwritten "all-comers" policy that requires RSOs to admit all students. At an early stage of the case, the CLS chapter seems to have agreed that the operative policy was the "all-comers" policy, but in filings and at oral argument today the lawyers for the CLS chapter tried to challenge both policies, forcing the Supreme Court Justices, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, to ask what, exactly, they were claiming in their suit.
The primary argument made by CLS's attorney, former federal judge Michael McConnell, was that the school could forbid groups that took discriminator action, but it could not refuse to recognize a group that chose its members based on beliefs. If all groups had to accept all beliefs, McConnell argued, that would require the campus Republican group to accept Democrats as voting members, for example. Justices were skeptical of this argument, and Justice Antonin Scalia noted that no one had presented any evidence that a group had ever been hijacked in this manner.
Additionally, the Justices seemed fairly unconcerned with the effects of being unrecognized. They noted that a group that was not an RSO could still meet on campus in public areas and was still free to communicate with students.
The case, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, will be decided before summer.