Third Circuit should "seize opportunity" to clarify free speech rulesJun 11, 2002
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals "should seize [the] opportunity
to make unmistakably clear that speech restrictions based on viewpoint—in
any type of forum— triggers the most demanding judicial scrutiny,"
according to an amicus curiae brief (PDF format, 109K) filed today by The Becket
Fund for Religious Liberty on behalf of Carol Hood. Mrs. Hood is the plaintiff
in a case originally entitled C.H. v. Oliva (now, Hood v. Medford Township Board
of Education ), involving several instances of public school discrimination
against her son Zachary because of his religious views.
Both the Egg Harbor case ( Walz v. Egg Harbor Township Board of Education )
and the Hood case involve instances where New Jersey public elementary schools
barred religious expression on the part of children enrolled there. In the Egg
Harbor case briefed today, Daniel Walz was prevented from giving pencils with
the inscription "Jesus (heart symbol) the little children" to other
students as gifts during a class party just before Easter, 1998. In the Hood
case, Zachary was barred from reading a story from his "Beginner's Bible,"
and a Thanksgiving poster indicating that he was "thankful for Jesus"
was removed from a hallway display.
A portion of the original Hood case is still before a U.S. District Court judge
on remand, and the brief filed today with the 3rd Circuit notes that the outcome
of the Egg Harbor appeal "will profoundly influence, if not determine,
the outcome of the remaining issues" in Mrs. Hood's case.
"This Court should make unmistakably clear that . . . restrictions on
student speech—especially religious speech—must be viewpoint neutral,"
The Becket Fund argues. Moreover, it should remove any doubt among school officials
that when they engage in " viewpoint discrimination . . . their decisions
will always be subject to the most demanding judicial scrutiny." The district
court in Hood applied a standard of review "that only applies to subject-matter
discrimination," the brief points out, and thus a "clearly established
principle of Free Speech law has been ignored."
A clear ruling by the appeals court in Egg Harbor could "resolve this
glaring error of law once and for all," the brief points out. The full
text of the amicus brief (PDF format, 109K), and considerable additional information
about both the Hood and Egg Harbor cases, can be found on The Becket Fund's
main web site: www.becketfund.org .
Relevant Cases
|
