© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
- Language
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
A lawsuit about bed-mates, or lack thereof, has united perhaps the most unlikely set of legal bedfellows ever to grace the Supreme Court's docket. In their defense of religious liberty, the organizations in question are clearly on the side of the angels - even if their own beliefs recognize no angels at all. On Feb. 16, the Supreme Court set oral arguments for April 19 in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, a case in which the University of California's Hastings College of Law (in San Francisco) denied official recognition to the Christian Legal Society (CLS), a conservative religious student group. Two weeks earlier, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed an amicus brief in support of CLS on behalf of separate organizations of Muslims, Sikhs, Jews, black Christians and Hispanic C...
Prior to June 2010, the circuits were split as to whether universities may refuse to fund student groups that discriminate against certain classes of individuals in violation of the universities’ nondiscrimination policies. In June 2010, the Supreme Court purported to resolve this circuit split in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, holding that a university policy requiring student groups to admit all students (an "all-comers policy") to receive university funding is constitutional. The Court, however, declined to resolve the larger issue-whether it is constitutional for a university to refuse to fund a student group that discriminates against a specific class of individuals who are protected by the university’s written nondiscrimination policy. This Note argues that the Supreme Court...
WASHINGTON, June 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, while disappointing to World Vision and other faith-based organizations, does not represent an erosion of authority regarding religious hiring rights. The court's 5-4 ruling addressed the insular environment of a public university, not the hiring practices of private nonprofit religious organizations. For the setting of a public university, the court ruled that the government's interest in promoting access to campus activities by all students outweighed the right of a religious student group to express its religious beliefs through its selection of leaders.
Illustrating an intellectual confusion common on campuses, Vanderbilt University says: To ensure "diversity of thought and opinion" it requires certain student groups, including five religious ones, to conform to the university's policy that forbids the groups from protecting their characteristics that contribute to diversity. Last year, after a Christian fraternity allegedly expelled a gay undergraduate because of his sexual practices, Vanderbilt redoubled its efforts to make the more than 300 student organizations comply with its "long-standing nondiscrimination policy." That policy, says a university official, does not allow the Christian Legal Society "to preclude someone from a leadership position based on religious belief." So an organization formed to express religious beliefs, i...
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company