Brandi Miller Drake EDL 276: Applications of School Law February, 2016 Board of Education of Westside Community Schools V. Mergens Brandi Miller Drake EDL 276: Applications of School Law February, 2016

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens QUESTION CASE ATTEMPTED TO ANSWER: Is restricting a Christian club to form on the Westside High School property consistent with what is stated in the Establishment Clause and if so, is the Equal Access Act unconstitutional?

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens WHO: Bridget Mergens, Senior at Westside school located in Omaha, Nebraska

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens WHAT: In 1985, Bridget Mergens, Senior at Westside School, wanted to form a Christian Bible Study Club within her school. Her school required a staff to sponsor the club however the district would not allow it as they didn’t want to be seen as favoring Christianity. Her principal denied Mergens request.

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens WHAT: Mergens and some other students decided to appeal the principal’s decision in the federal courts claiming the school’s denial was a violation of a 1984 federal law, Equal Access Act, requiring “equal access” for student religious groups.

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens EQUAL ACCESS ACT: Prohibits any public secondary school that receives federal financial assistance and maintains a “limited open forum” from discriminating against students who wish to conduct a meeting within that forum because of the content of their speech. Religious discussion and worship are core forms of speech protected by the First Amendment and cannot be barred from an open forum on the basis of content Ensures that student groups at covered schools will not be denied the same right to meet that the school extends to other student groups solely on the basis of the content of their speech ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: Protect an open, neutral forum for religious and other expression.

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens WHEN: Bridget Mergens was denied rights to start a Christian club in 1985 The Rehnquist Court heard arguments on January 9th, 1990 and ruled on the case – June 4th, 1990 in favor of Mergens

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens FINAL DECISION RENDERED: The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, by an 8-1 margin, found that the principal had denied Mergens her free exercise rights as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment and that the school would have to accommodate her request to form a prayer group. The school district appealed to the Supreme Court.

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens FINAL DECISIONS RENDERED: The Court held that since Westside permitted other noncurricular clubs, it was prohibited under the Equal Access Act from denying equal access to any after-school club based on the content of its speech. The proposed Christian club would be a noncurricular group since no other course required students to become its members, its subject matter would not actually be taught in classes, it did not concern the schools cumulative body of courses, and its members would not receive academic credit for their participation. The Court added that the Equal Access Act was constitutional because it served an overriding secular purpose by prohibiting discrimination on the basis of philosophical, political, or other types of speech. As such, the Act protected the Christian club’s formation even if its members engaged in religious discussions.

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated: “A high school does not have to permit extracurricular activities, but when it does, the school is bound by the Equal Access Act of 1984.” “There is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion…Allowing students to meet on campus and discuss religion is constitutional because it does not amount to ‘state sponsorship of a religion’.”

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOLS: You can not prohibit any club from using space in your building if you receive federal financial assistance. Allowing student religious clubs on the same basis as other student-initiated clubs is equal treatment, not school endorsement of religion.