Hey! Universities! Leave Them Kids Alone!: Christian Legal Society v. Martinez and Conditioning Equal Access to a University’s Student-Organization Forum
By David Brown.
Imagine the following scenario: You are a student at the unimaginatively-named Public University. You and a handful of other students form a student organization on campus called “Students for World Peace” with the purpose of advocating world peace. Your organization applies for official recognition to take advantage of the benefits provided by the school’s registered student organization program: use of classrooms to hold meetings; access to the email system and bulletin boards; the ability to request modest funds; and the opportunity to dialog with other student groups. You willingly comply with the university’s regulations, including the university’s nondiscrimination policy. Citing its nondiscrimination policy, the university imposes an “accept-all-comers” policy, requiring student groups to accept any student for membership or leadership regardless of the student’s beliefs. Your organization is granted official recognition.
After a successful inaugural year, your organization holds elections for the following academic year. To your dismay, a large handful of students who oppose world peace have joined the group and are now running for office. Unfortunately, because the university’s accept-all-comers policy prohibits your group from adopting a selective membership policy, these peace-haters take over the organization. The newly elected board’s first order of business is to change the organization’s mission to impede world peace, believing that disharmony is good for society and that world peace is unattainable.
While some members of the United States Supreme Court think that such a “hostile takeover” of a student organization is unlikely, the Court recently held in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (“CLS”) that a university may condition official recognition of a student organization on the requirement that the organization accept all students who wish to participate regardless of status or beliefs. As the scenario above suggests, however, if the group is not permitted to engage in selective membership, the Court’s holding may have a significant impact on the ability of a student group to communicate its mission and effectuate its goals. CLS is the latest Supreme Court case to consider university students’ First Amendment rights in connection with a public university’s ability to condition access to a student-group forum. Many universities create student-group forums to promote speech and debate on campus. Often, universities will impose restrictions on student groups who wish to participate in the forum.