Thursday February 11, 2010
U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Whether Christian Student Clubs Can Prefer Christian Leaders
By Kathleen Gilbert
SAN DIEGO, February 11, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Scores of Christian and religious organizations have filed at least 21 amicus curiae briefs supporting the Christian Legal Society (CLS) against a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the society’s right to select Christian leaders for its group at a University campus.
The case, filed against University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, will essentially test whether law schools can deny official recognition to student chapters of the Christian Legal Society.
While CLS welcomes anyone to attend meetings and events, it requires that the officers and voting members who provide direction for the Society agree with and abide by the group’s Statement of Faith. UC Hastings considers CLS’s faith requirement to be in conflict with the school’s non-discrimination policies.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of UC Hastings, relying on one of the Ninth Circuit’s earlier rulings that had barred a Christian high school club from requiring that its leaders affirm a statement of faith. The U.S. Supreme Court accepted CLS’s request to appeal that decision in December.
The Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) submitted an amicus curiae brief for the case last Thursday, arguing that UC Hastings’ actions are inconsistent with prior Supreme Court freedom of speech and association rulings.
“Once again, the Ninth Circuit is out of step with other federal courts around the country, which have upheld the common-sense principle that a Christian or other faith-based student club should be able to have members and leadership who agree with and abide by their statement of faith and exclude those who do not,” commented PJI affiliate attorney Pete Lepiscopo, the author of the brief. “The implications of this case are far reaching.”
“Freedom of speech includes freedom of association,” said Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute.
“It would be absurd to demand that an atheist student club allow people of faith to become officers, or that the Democratic student club allow itself to be overrun with Republicans,” said Dacus. “Such rules would quickly destroy the identity of these and countless other groups, leading to intellectual dullness, not diversity.
“In the same way, we think it is self-evident that the Christian Legal Society should have the ability to choose Christian leaders for itself.”