Campus groups cannot discriminate against gays and receive school funding. That’s how the Supreme Court decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez is being interpreted by much of the media. It’s truthfully an overstatement of what the 5-4 decision stands for, but the ruling does have the effect of allowing schools to require open admission to campus groups, including gays.
The case comes from the University of California – Hastings which set certain standards for Registered Student Organizations (RSO’s). RSO’s receive certain benefits which are paid by mandatory assessments collected from all students. The UC-Hastings Law School set conditions that, to qualify for official standing, RSO’s must allow all students who wish to do so to join the organization. The school refers to this as an “all comers” policy.
The Christian Legal Society (CLS) applied to be an RSO, but was denied because it required written commitments of faith and a commitment to sexual relations only in the context of heterosexual marriage. CLS further interpreted its bylaws to require the exclusion of anyone who engaged in “unrepentant homosexual conduct.”
The Court, in an opinion written by Justice Ginsburg, found the schools “all comers” policy to be constitutional. The policy, according to the Court, does not violate the freedom of religion, freedom of speech or freedom of association clauses. The “all comers” policy was both reasonable and viewpoint neutral, therefore surviving constitutional scrutiny.
In arriving at its decision, the Court took note of the fact that all students paid mandatory fees to support RSO’s, that CLS had doubled in size and meeting attendance without RSO status and that the school implemented the policy to comply with state nondiscrimination laws. CLS’s argument that the “all comers” policy could result in sabotage from antagonistic individuals joining their group was deemed speculative and was not considered in reaching the Court’s decision.
This decision does not require schools to adopt an “all comers” policy for RSO’s. It simply says that, if a school adopts such a policy, it is constitutional to do so. Justice Kennedy provided the swing vote for the majority. Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito dissented. Full opinion here.
Cross posted at Elijah’s Sweete Spot.
Contributor, aka tidbits. Retired attorney in complex litigation, death penalty defense and constitutional law. Former Nat’l Board Chair: Alzheimer’s Association. Served on multiple political campaigns, including two for U.S. Senator Mark O. Hatfield (R-OR). Contributing author to three legal books and multiple legal publications.