Student Christian Groups Lose Challenge To University Non-Discrimination Rules

In Every Nation Campus Ministries v. Achtenberg, (SD CA, Feb. 6, 2008), a California federal district court upheld the application of the California State University’s non-discrimination policy to four Christian groups at two universities. At San Diego State University and California State University Long Beach, officials refused official recognition to the four student groups because they refused to admit non-Christians as members. They also denied membership to "individuals who believe they are innately homosexual, or advocate the viewpoint that homosexuality is a natural part of God's created order." Relying on the 9th Circuit’s 2008 decision in Truth v. Kent School District (see prior posting), the court concluded that the schools may apply their policy against discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, color, age, gender, marital status, citizenship, sexual orientation, or disability to these student groups. It concluded:

the CSU student organization program is a limited public forum to which the state may restrict access as long as the restrictions are reasonable and viewpoint-neutral in light of the purpose served by the forum, which they are. The Court further finds the First Amendment burdens imposed by the policy are viewpoint-neutral and uniformly applied to all clubs irrespective of their particular viewpoints. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' free association, free speech, and free exercise rights are not impermissibly infringed by the policy, nor is there any evidence that Plaintiffs have been treated inequitably in their exclusion from the forum due to their discriminatory membership criteria.

In the course of its decision, the court said that it was leaving open the question of whether the restrictions imposed by these groups amount to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, since some homosexuals could become members under the groups’ criteria. Today's San Diego Union Tribune, reporting on the decision, says an appeal in the case is likely.