But I'm not sure their purpose for doing so has any relevance for the legal question here. This is not an establishment clause challenge where the purpose prong comes into play, it's a challenge to their tax exempt status under the IRS code. I don't know what the standard is for such a challenge, but I can't imagine that purpose would matter. If a church provided a material benefit to one candidate over another but said that their purpose was not political but based solely on their concern about abortion, would that be less of a possible problem legally? I'm not sure the AU really has much of a legal case here, since as I said I really don't know much about the precedents or standards for this particular type of challenge, but it doesn't seem to me that merely stating their purpose does much to mitigate the challenge.
Ed Brayton -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Pardee Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 4:42 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: AU challenges tax exempt status of Liberty University The other side of the debate: Liberty talks about the complaint filed by Americans United https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=18495&MID=8374 Liberty met with the College Democrats to find a compromise that would satisfy both sides https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=18495&MID=8375 Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr speaks to the media coverage given to this issue https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=18495&MID=8373 It seems quite clear that it's not about Republicans versus Democrats as Barry Lynn would have the IRS believe. In this case, the College Democrats didn't lose recognition or funding because they were Democrats. It was because their constitution pledged to support the Democratic platform and candidates without qualification, and the national Democratic Party supports legal abortion and and same-sex marriage. A Republican pro-choice group would not get recognition or funding. A Republican group that supports same-sex marriage would not get recognition or funding. As Chancellor Falwell wrote: "Parents and students support the University because they believe in its distinctly Christian identity and mission. Liberty University is pro-life and believes that marriage between one man and one woman provides the best environment for children. Liberty University will not lend its name or financial support to any student group that advances causes contrary to its mission." If the Republican party platform expressed support for legal abortion and same-sex marriage, and the College Republicans' constitution said they would support the Republican platform and candidates without qualification, they too would receive the same treatment. My bet is that once they alter their constitution to limit their support to Democratic candidates and platform planks that are pro-life and support traditional marriage, neither recognition or funding will be an issue. Brad Pardee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Brayton" <[email protected]> To: "'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:34 PM Subject: AU challenges tax exempt status of Liberty University > In the wake of Liberty U pulling recognition from the College Democrats > club, Americans United has written a letter to the IRS challenging their > tax > exempt status. The letter says: > > > > "Political clubs operating on campus often endorse and work on behalf of > candidates, and officially recognized clubs are eligible for funding > through > student-activity fees. This decision by Liberty University effectively > means > that only the Republican club, which works to elect Republicans, will > receive funding. The university's decision offers Republican candidates a > type of in-kind contribution that is not being made available to > Democratic > candidates." > > > > http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/au-letter-to-irs-re-liberty. > pdf > > > > Any thoughts on whether they have a strong case here? > > > > Ed > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to [email protected] > 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. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] 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. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] 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.
