back to the thread's original content:
Christian Legal Society: It's not over yetonenewsnow.comChristian Legal SocietyThe Supreme Court has rendered a decision in a religious liberty case -- but it may not be the last word.
On Monday the high court turned away an appeal from the Christian Legal Society, which sued to get funding and recognition from the University of California's Hastings College of the Law. The CLS requires voting members to sign a statement of faith and regards "unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle" as being inconsistent with that faith. But Hastings says recognized campus groups must allow all students to be voting members, not excluding people due to religious belief or sexual orientation.
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.
Jordan Lorence (ADF)According to the attorney, while only a handful of law schools have this policy, most require no discrimination based on religion.
"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," says Lorence. "But only the religious groups are the ones that are required to accept people who don't agree with their message."
Lorence says the court's ruling has not closed the door on the issue. "It's not over with and there's a lot more litigation," he remarks. "This isn't even a loss...in the sense that we've lost this issue. It's that the Supreme Court has basically kicked it down the road for another day."
ADF senior legal counsel Gregory Baylor puts it this way: "The conflict still exists. This decision doesn't settle the core constitutional issue of whether nondiscrimination policies in general can force religious student groups to allow non-believers to lead their groups. Long-term, the decision puts other student groups across the country at risk, and we will continue to fight for their constitutional rights."