The Supreme Court vs. the First Amendment

By: American Decency Staff

Yesterday, the Supreme Court made a disturbing decision which could be a severe threat to religious liberty in the future. Whether or not it threatens our freedom in the future, it is a depressing indicator of where our current Supreme Court judges stand on the issue of our free expression of religion.The decision that I am referring to is the case of Christian Legal Society (CLS) v. Martinez. In this case, the CLS had sued Hastings College of the Law for funding which was being denied them due to their bylaws. The “problemâ€Â with the bylaws is that they required that members sign a statement of faith which bars the membership of those in "unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle" including homosexuality. Hastings College of the Law refused to recognize or fund the group because of a policy which does not allow exclusion of students due to religious belief or sexual orientation. Onenewsnow.com: “In Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, the student chapter was represented in part by the Alliance Defense Fund. ADF senior counsel Jordan Lorence tells OneNewsNow he is disappointed that the court chose to affirm a policy that very few universities have. ‘That is, a requirement that every student organization accept as members people who don't agree with their message — that they have to allow everyone to join,’ he explains.â€Â Lorence goes on to say, “Groups that have nothing to do with religion — environmentalist groups, homosexual groups, feminist groups, etc. — they are allowed to kick out members who don't agree with their message, but only the religious groups are the ones that are required to accept people who don't agree with their message." Essentially, the Supreme Court said that although student groups are not to discriminate on the basis of religion, universities have the right to do exactly that. The fundamental frustrating injustice is that the money that is given to the various organizations is from tuitions paid by Christians just as much as by environmental, political, minority group activists, or whatever other organizations exist on campus. Thankfully, this is not as big of a loss as it may at first seem. The Alliance Defense Fund explains it this way: “The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5–4 Monday to uphold an unusual university policy that forces student groups to allow outsiders who disagree with their beliefs to become leaders and voting members.  The court confined its opinion to the unique policy and did not address whether nondiscrimination policies in general, which are typical on public university campuses, may require this.   The court concluded that public universities may override a religious student group’s right to determine its leadership only if it denies that right to all student groups.â€Â The potential for problems exist in the fear that this decision may put in those who desire to create such groups on their own campuses. Knowing how the Supreme Court ruled on this case may dissuade those in similar situations from founding groups relating to Christianity. It also establishes a precedent foothold in the court should a similar case with larger scope be brought to the bench.

---