Posted on 08/29/2022 4:46:37 PM PDT by aimhigh
Civil Rights
The panel reversed the district court’s denial of a motion for a preliminary injunction sought by a derecognized student club, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and directed the district court to enter an order reinstating the Fellowship as a student club within the San Jose Unified School District.
The Fellowship of Christian Athletes (“FCA”) requires students serving in leadership roles to abide by a Statement of Faith, which includes the belief that sexual relations should be limited within the context of a marriage between a man and a woman. The San Jose Unified School District (the “School District”) revoked FCA’s status as an official student club at its high schools, claiming that FCA’s religious pledge requirement violated the School District’s non-discrimination policy.
The panel first held that FCA National had direct organizational standing and Pioneer High School FCA had representational organizational standing to seek prospective injunctive relief. The School District’s denial of Associated Student Body (“ASB”) recognition hampered FCA National’s ability to further student-engagement with the Christian faith and required it to expend significant time and resources to assist its student members. Pioneer High School FCA had standing to pursue injunctive relief on behalf of its student members given that defendants admitted that submitting an ASB application would be futile under the current policy and plaintiffs submitted declarations showing that Pioneer High School students intended to apply for recognition in the coming year.
Addressing the merits, the panel first held that plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction sought to maintain the status quo that existed before the School District’s novel scrutiny of FCA—a prohibitory injunction—so the district court erred in applying the heightened standard for mandatory injunctions. The panel held that plaintiffs would likely prevail on the merits of its selective enforcement claim under the Free Exercise Clause. The panel stated that this case pitted two competing values that we cherish as a nation: the principle of non-discrimination on the one hand, and the First Amendment’s protection of free exercise of religion and free speech on the other hand.
While this clash of values may pose a difficult policy choice, the legal outcome was much more straightforward based on the record. Under the First Amendment, our government must be scrupulously neutral when it comes to religion: It cannot treat religious groups worse than comparable secular ones. But the School District did just that. The School District engaged in selective enforcement of its own non-discrimination policy, penalizing FCA while looking the other way with other secular student groups that maintained facially discriminatory membership criteria. For example, the School District blessed student clubs whose constitutions limited membership based on gender identity or ethnicity, despite the school’s policies barring such restricted membership. Plaintiffs presented clear evidence that the School District selectively applied its policy against FCA because FCA requires its student leaders to abide by its statements of belief. That means that the School District’s policies were not generally applicable or neutral, triggering strict scrutiny, a standard the School District could not meet.
A quote from page 14 of the decision:
And Michelle Bowman, another teacher and member of the Climate Committee, shared Glasser’s negative views of FCA. In an email she later sent to a student in November 2020, she wrote:
“Even with the Biden win, millions of people voted for the real devil. And, evangelicals, like FCA, are charlatans and not in the least bit Christian based or they “conveniently”
forget what tolerance means . . . They choose darkness over knowledge and they perpetuate ignorance.”
Completely lost on them that this is itself discriminating against them for their faith. The only ones being bigoted was the school district.
Such a “teacher” has no business being in the education system...and unfortunately, the education system is now filled with people like this.
The 9th Circus did this? An actual vote for expansion of freedoms? This has not happened in like 40 years.
Trump helped stack the 9th to something approaching fairness. Not quite but closer.
This was a direct result of the jurists that President Trump nominated, and to his credit, McConnell rammed through congress!
If they told us we could not have a Christen Club when were in school we would have told them well just watch us...and go ahead and do it.
People these days are such wimps thinking they have to have permission to do something.
What happened to QUESTION AUTHORITY bumper stickers?
I thought I heard a herd of pigs flying over the house...
U.S. District Judge
Haywood Gilliam, Obama appointee, who denied the FCA's request for the injunction.
Appellate Judges
Majority
Kenneth K. Lee (Opinion), Trump appointee
Danielle J. Forrest (Concurrence), Trump appointee
Dissenting
Morgan Christen, Obama appointee
Unfortunately President Biden has exceeded President Trump’s nominees an appointment by far. And he learned from Trump to put young judges on the court so will be stuck with them for 40 years. President Biden’s addition numbers are historic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.