In something of a surprise, the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeal of the Bronx Household of Faith. This decision leaves in place a 2nd Circuit Appeals Court ruling that New York City has the right to bar the use of public school buildings for religious worship when school is not in session. The opinion draws a very fine distinction between the use of public buildings for religious worship – which the court said a local government may disallow – and use of public buildings for religious meetings or discussion. Here's a snippet:
[The City's rule] prohibits use of school facilities to conduct worship services, but does not exclude religious groups from using schools for prayer, singing hymns, religious instruction, expression of religious devotion, or the discussion of issues from a religious point of view. While it is true without question that religious worship services include such expressions of points of view, the fact that a reasonably excluded activity includes expressions of viewpoints does not render the exclusion of the activity unconstitutional if adherents are free to use the school facilities for expression of those viewpoints in all ways except through the reasonably excluded activity…. [T]he schools are freely available for use by groups to express religious devotion through prayer, singing of hymns, preaching, and teaching of scripture or doctrine. It is only the performance of a worship service that is excluded.
Many observers – myself included – were predicting the Court would want to take the case as it seems to run counter to recent decisions guaranteeing equal access to religious organizations. As the Baptist Joint Committee's Brent Walker said in response to the 2nd Circuit's ruling:
“The school can hide the keys on Friday and not open up again until Monday,” Walker said. “But if it does open up to the outside, the school has to treat religion the same as any other group.”
Is religious worship "reasonably excluded?"
