(LifeSiteNews) — In one of the boldest First Amendment cases in recent memory, the conservative American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) is challenging a Massachusetts town for not only denying a pastor the use of public library meeting space for Bible study but also demanding a local newspaper pull an advertisement for alternate meetings in a public park.
ACLJ does not name the pastor they’re representing or identify the town in which the situation occurred, but details that their client initially requested one of the spaces, which are officially available for “informational, educational, cultural, and civic benefit,” both for Bible studies and grief support meetings.
After initially approving the request for biweekly meetings, the library director later relayed that “the Town Administration and Legal Counsel” had determined rooms could only “be used for occasional events but not for recurring events like bi-monthly Bible studies.” Follow-up requests to reserve space went unanswered.
So the pastor attempted to organize a Bible study in a local public park, for which he submitted an advertisement to the local newspaper. Town officials demanded the ad be pulled, claiming it lacked “proper approval” for a “social function” in the park, which the pastor maintains the meeting would not have been.
In response, ACLJ has sent a letter to town officials demanding the pastor be allowed the same access to library space and the park permitted to any other member of the community or else it will initiate legal action.
“This case is reminiscent of conduct the ACLJ successfully challenged more than 30 years ago in Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993),” the group writes. “In Lamb’s Chapel, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that the ‘government violates the First Amendment when it denies access to a speaker solely to suppress the point of view he espouses on an otherwise includible subject.’ The Court ruled in our favor and held that a public school’s decision to exclude a church from using its meeting spaces to show a Christian film certainly violates the First Amendment.”
“The same is true of the park,” it continues. “The Supreme Court has emphasized that ‘streets and parks, which have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. … In these quintessential public forums, the government may not prohibit all communicative activity.’ Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n, 460 U.S. 37, 38 (1983). Requiring a permit before a small group gathers on the grass of a public park is antithetical to the First Amendment. And ordering a newspaper to remove an ad for a private event is utterly unthinkable.”