Supreme Court Rules Religious Clubs Are Entitled to Use School Facilities

Jewish groups are distressed at the Supreme Court’s decision Monday to uphold a law requiring public high schools to give religious clubs the same access to school facilities as other “non-curriculum-related” groups.

In an 8-1 ruling, the court said an Omaha, Neb., high school had to allow a Bible-study group to meet after hours on school property.

In doing so, it upheld the constitutionality of the Equal Access Act of 1984, which requires public schools that allow “one or more non-curriculum-related student groups to meet on school premises during non-instructional time” to grant the same privilege to religious groups.

Jewish groups strenuously oppose the law and have challenged it in court, contending it violates the First Amendment’s ban on government endorsement of religion.

Also Monday, the court rejected a petition from Jewish and other religious groups to reconsider its April 17 decision allowing Oregon to prosecute two members of an Indian church who use peyote in religious rituals.

In that case, the court ruled that enforcing a state law that makes it a crime to possess or use the hallucinogen would not infringe upon the Indians’ First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.

Jewish groups had expressed concern about the ruling, fearing it could be used as a precedent to prosecute Jews for various ritual practices that might be banned by local laws. An example would be drinking of Kiddush wine by minors not old enough to consume alcohol legally.

PEYOTE CASE RULING ‘DISTURBING’

In light of the court’s refusal to rehear the case, Jewish groups such as Agudath Israel of America and the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith will now examine various state laws to see if they can be strengthened to protect religious practices.

The decision in the peyote case “turned back free-exercise jurisprudence many, many decades, ” commented Abba Cohen, Agudath Israel’s Washington representative.

Donald Mintz, chairman of ADL’s Civil Rights Committee, called the ruling “extremely disturbing.”

Mark Stern, legal director of the American Jewish Congress, said both court decisions threaten religious liberty, although he would not say whether the greater threat is government interference in religious practice or government “allowing itself to aid religion.”

Both cases show that on religious issues, the court is “not willing to second-guess the judgment of democratic bodies,” Stern said, referring to the Oregon state legislature in the peyote case and to Congress in the case involving the Omaha high school.

The Omaha case pitted Westside Community High School against Bridget Mergens, who as a senior had tried unsuccessfully in 1985 to win official recognition from the school for a Bible study group she wanted to hold after classes.

A federal district court ruled that the school could refuse to grant recognition to the Bible study group, but the decision was reversed in February 1989 by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.

When the case went to the Supreme Court, AJCongress served as co-counsel, largely writing the brief filed on the high school’s behalf. Friend-of-the-court briefs backing the school were submitted by the American Jewish Committee, and the ADL, which did so on behalf of the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council and the American Civil Liberties Union.

COULD ALLOW SCHOOL PROSELYTIZING

Jewish groups supported the school’s position that allowing the Bible class to meet would constitute a government endorsement of religion, banned by the First Amendment.

But in her majority opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote, “We think that high school students are mature enough and are likely to understand that a school does not endorse or support student speech that it merely permits on a non-discriminatory basis.”

Justice John Paul Stevens, the sole dissenter in the case, argued that the court’s decision “comes perilously close to an outright command to allow organized prayer (and perhaps other religious ceremonies) on school premises.”

Jewish groups sounded similar warnings.

Robert Lifton, president of AJCongress, said the decision “will open up the nation’s public high schools to proselytizing by organized student religious clubs and will ultimately result in religious divisiveness.”

Burton Levinson, ADL’s national chairman, said the ruling is ” troubling, because it sanctions the use of public school facilities to advance religion, in violation of the First Amendment.”