Distributing nothing from outside groups is a plausible policy, but not one
that Montgomery County was willing to live with. These cases are always about
viewpoint discrimination; the school sends home flyers for some groups but not
other groups.
The reason there was a second appeal in Montgomery County was that after losing
the first time, the school board said nothing goes home in the backpacks except
school material. Then they defined school material to include anything from a
private group that the school chose to sponsor. Wholly unguided discretion on
what the school could choose to sponsor. Not surprisingly, the court saw that
as a formula for continuing the same discrimination that had just been
invalidated.
Quoting "Brownstein, Alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> A more complete accommodation would allow students and parents to
> inform the school that they do not want to receive materials from
> certain outside groups. But maybe this accommodation already exists
> in these systems.
>
> I continue to believe that, with rare exceptions, students at public
> schools should not be used as conduits for the distribution of
> materials from outside groups that are not a part of the school
> program.
>
> Alan Brownstein
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas
> Laycock
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 7:28 AM
> To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> Subject: Re: Sending Good News Club Fliers Home With Students
>
>
> I think this has already been litigated in the Third Circuit, and the
> school district lost. Child Evangelism Fellowship v. Stafford
> Township School District, 386 F.3d 514 (3d Cir. 2004) (Alito, J.).
> It's only an appeal from a preliminary injunction, but on a very
> quick skim, it looks like Alito pretty much decides it as a matter of
> law; he doesn't seem to restrict himself to probable sucess on the
> merits.
>
> It has also been litigated in the Fourth Circuit, in the Montgomery
> County Schools, with the same result on two appeals. I saw Gus
> Steinhilber at a conference a while ago; he used to be general
> counsel to the National Association of School Boards and he
> represented Montgomery County. He told me that many of the Jewish
> teachers absolutely refused to distribute the flyers no matter what
> the court said. The school board went to the union and negotiated a
> deal where, for extra pay, Christian teachers would distribute the
> flyers in all the classrooms. He didn't say whether the Jewish
> teachesr were insisting on their own view of the Establishmetn
> Clause, or making a claim of conscience, but this sounds like a
> reasonable accomodation to me.
>
> Quoting James Maule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> FYI, for what it's worth, perhaps of interest to someone writing
>> about this issue. (Haverford Township is in Delaware County, just to
>> the west of Philadelphia).
>>
>> Jim Maule
>> Villanova University School of Law
>>
>>> From http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/35457869.html[1]
>>
>> Selected portions:
>>
>> Evangelical group sues Haverford district over fliers
>>
>> Haverford Township school officials are trying to extricate the
>> district from a legal tussle with an evangelical Christian group that
>> wants to send informational fliers home with grade-school students.
>> Child Evangelism Fellowship (CEF) filed suit against the Haverford
>> Township School District in late October after the district refused
>> to distribute fliers promoting the group's after-school Good News
>> Club.
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> After CEF sued, the district relented and sent out between 750 and
>> 800 fliers in students' Friday take-home folders the week before
>> Thanksgiving, said Mary Beth Lauer, the district's
>> community-relations director. The fliers, which were sent home with
>> students at Chatham Park and Chestnutwold Elementaries, contained a
>> disclaimer declaring that the school did not sponsor or endorse the
>> activity.
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> In a statement, Superintendent William Keilbaugh said: "If, as
>> alleged, our rule of distributing only school and township youth
>> recreation program materials was not strictly complied with, and
>> other groups' materials were sent home with students, that was an
>> inadvertent error we will correct going forward."
>>
>> The district is hoping to settle the matter out of court, although it
>> might still be on the hook for legal and court fees. Meanwhile,
>> school officials are trying to figure how to best enforce the
>> district's flier policy - which allows only school- and
>> township-sponsored groups to send home letters with the children -
>> without hurting groups such as PTOs.
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> Cheryl Wert, a PTO member at Chestnutwold, said the district would
>> not allow her to send a flier about this weekend's holiday gift and
>> craft fair, an annual fund-raiser for the PTO.
>>
>> * * *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw[2]
>>
>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Douglas Laycock
> Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
> University of Michigan Law School
> 625 S. State St.
> Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
> 734-647-9713
>
Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
734-647-9713
Links:
------
[1] http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/35457869.html
[2] http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
