The Supreme Court upheld the University of California Law School refusal to acknowledge - and thereby provide school funding and support for - a Christian club that refused admission of gays.
[quote=“LA Times”]The society chapter formed at the law school in 2004 required members to forswear “unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle,” which it defined as sex outside of heterosexual marriage.
The court’s opinion, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said the law school’s decision was reasonable in that the state-funded university requires all groups wearing its endorsement to be nondiscriminatory.
“Hastings, through its [Registered Student Organization] program, is dangling the carrot of subsidy, not wielding the stick of prohibition,” Ginsburg wrote in the opinion, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in dissent that the majority ruling amounted to “no freedom for expression that offends prevailing standards of political correctness in our country’s institutions of higher learning.”
Alito, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, noted that Hastings has more than 60 registered student groups and that in its entire history has denied registration to “exactly one: the Christian Legal Society.” Alito said the majority gave public educational institutions “a handy weapon for suppressing the speech of unpopular groups.”[/quote]
The usual load of garbage from the social conservatives on the Supreme Court:
- implying this rejection of official status is unfair because “60 other groups were accepted and only one rejected - the Christians” defies logic: did the other 60 discriminate?
- this is now “a handy weapon for suppressing speech”; really? How’s that? In the decision text itself:
Yeah and the “liberals” are the “activist” judges. The conservatives are just making shit up here to push a pro-religious, anti-homosexual rights agenda.