Important Court Ruling Re. Religious Freedom on Secular College Campuses
US court rules, university wrong to exclude student group
ENI-10-0623
By Adelle M. Banks
Washington DC, 10 September (ENI/RNS)–The University of Wisconsin should not have prohibited the use of student funds for the worship-related activities of a Roman Catholic campus group, a federal appeals court has ruled.
The University of Wisconsin at Madison distributes funds from student fees for activities of registered student groups but rejected paying for worship, religious instruction and proselytising by Badger Catholic, a student association, Religion New Service reports.
“A university cannot shape Badger Catholic’s message by selectively funding the speech it approves, but not the speech it disapproves,” wrote Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the 1 September decision.
The Alliance Defense Fund, which sued on behalf of the student group, had argued that Catholics had been the victim of viewpoint discrimination.
“The constitutional rights of Christian student organizations should be recognized by university officials just as they recognize those rights for other student groups,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jordan Lorence.
The 2-1 majority said the recent Supreme Court decision, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, left “no doubt” that the Wisconsin school should reimburse Badger Catholic programs it had rejected for funding.
The higher court ruled in June that a Christian student group must accept gays and non-Christians as members if it wanted to receive official recognition from a public university’s law school.
Circuit Judge Ann Claire Williams dissented, saying the rejection of funding for religious activities is a “neutral exclusion.”
University spokesperson Dennis Chaptman said the school’s attorneys are reviewing the decision. [265 words]
Ecumenical News International
PO Box 2100
CH – 1211 Geneva 2
Switzerland
One can argue that student funds should not be used to fund the speech of any group, no matter what it stands for. But if student funding at a state university is to be distributed to some groups, then it must be given to every group. That is the risk you take when the government subsidizes speech (no matter how indirectly).
Which is why I oppose having student groups funded by student fees no matter what they stand for. Note that the courts have also ruled that the a Christian group must accept homosexuals and non-Christians in order to receive funding. Given a chance, secular authorities will try to bend organizations (both private and public) to their will.