Justices Split Over College Rejection of Christian Student Group

2 years ago

0 Comments Say Something »

Text Size

Contributor

U.S. Supreme Court justices seemed to split along ideological lines Monday in a case that pits anti-discrimination policies in public universities against the First Amendment rights of students.

Christian Legal Society sued the University of California Hastings School of Law in 2004 when the school denied the group's application to become an officially recognized student organization, which would give it access to funding, priority access to campus space and official listings. The group requires members to sign a statement of faith, which includes language barring homosexuals and non-Christians from joining.

Much of Monday's debate came down to the school's "all comers" policy that requires student organizations to include any student who wishes to join.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, members of the Court's liberal wing, peppered CLS attorney Michael McConnell with questions about the discriminatory nature of the group's policies.

"Are you suggesting that if a group wanted to exclude all black people, all women, all handicapped persons that a school has to accept that group and recognize it, give it funds and otherwise lend it space?" Sotomayor asked.

But conservatives Antonin Scalia and Chief Justice John Roberts were quick to question the value of the rule at all. The two frequently interrupted Hastings attorney Gregory Garre to pose hypothetical situations and ask him how the policy would be applied.

"It would require the campus Republican Club to admit Democrats," Scalia said. "Not just to membership but to officership."

"It seems your policy is evolving to meet whatever First Amendment pressure comes," Roberts said of the Hastings defense.

The justices spent considerable time trying to determine what the issues before the court even were.Both Anthony Kennedy and Steven Breyer questioned whether the facts of the case had been fully argued before coming to the Supreme Court. Scalia and Breyer characterized the rule as "silly" and "crazy" at separate points.

Alliance Defense Fund attorney Casey Mattox, an organization supporting CLS, said the questioning led him to believe the justices' ruling may favor the Christian group.

"I am hoping they see Hastings' policy isn't just unreasonably, its silly," he said.

But Hastings supporters said the issue is constitutionality.

"Even if the policy may be silly if applied in the extreme," said the Rev. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, "the issue is if it is constitutional."

Filed Under: Supreme Court

Tagged: Christian Legal Society, ChristianLegalSociety, dailyguidance, discrimination, first amendment rights, FirstAmendmentRights, University of California Hastings, UniversityOfCaliforniaHastings

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.