Freedom of Religion — Whether allowing the Good News Club to use school facilities for meetings would have constituted a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Religion: No; the court found that permitting the Club to hold meetings in school facilities would not have created an Establishment Clause violation.

About the Milford Community: About 500 students attend the Milford Central School (Milford, N.Y.), which houses grades K -12. Milford, 60 miles west of Albany, has about 2,700 residents and lies in the midst of one of New York's richest dairy regions. From all press accounts, members of the Milford characterize this case as a "neighborly disagreement."

About the Good News Clubs: The Child Evangelism Fellowship, a non-sectarian, Christian missionary organization, sponsors some 4,400 Good News clubs in the United States for children ages 6 to 12. The 'tender age' of the children in question is central to the Court's analysis of the case. Rev. Stephen Fournier and his wife lead the Good News Club of Milford; it has approximately 25 members.

1992 — Government/School Policy at Issue: New York state allows local school boards to adopt their own regulations for community use of school property. The Milford school district's policy is stated in a handbook:

(1) School facilities "may be used by district residents for holding social, civic and recreational meetings and entertainment events and other uses pertaining to the welfare of the community …"

(2) "School premises shall not be used by any individual or organization for religious purposes."

1996 — The School's Application of the Policy: The Good News Club of Milford, for reasons not relevant to the case, seeks a new place in which to conduct its meetings. (It formerly met at a local church.) It submits a 'District Use of Facilities Request' asking to use the school as a meeting place. An interim superintendent refuses access, finding that the Good News Club's meetings would be "the equivalent of religious worship … rather than the expression of religious views or values on a secular subject."

After an attorney raises the issue that denial of access to the Good News Club while access is allowed to the Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and the 4-H Club may violate the club's rights, school official solicit additional information about the meetings of the club, reconsider the request for facility access, and again deny access to the club.

1997 — The Case: The Good News Club files in federal district court and offers arguments related to freedom of speech, equal protection and religious freedom under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The district court holds in summary judgment for the Milford Central School.

2000 — 2nd Circuit: Hearing an appeal limited to the First Amendment issue claim, the 2nd Circuit panel (2-1) affirms the district court's dismissal of the free speech claim. The appellate court finds that the school was not discriminating between viewpoints but rather had excluded the club because the content of its meetings consisted of "religious instruction and prayer" — a permissible viewpoint-neutral reason.

The Supreme Court grants the petition for cert. on October 10.

A government-operated limited public forum is not required to and does not allow individuals to engage in all types of speech. Under Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995), content-based discrimination is allowed in a limited public forum so long as the restricted speech falls outside the purpose of the limited forum. Viewpoint-based discrimination, however, is impermissible if the speech in question falls within the purpose of the limited forum. Thus, the government may restrict speech within the limited public forum if the restriction is not a viewpoint-based limitation and if the restriction is reasonable in light of the forum's purpose.

Establishment Clause: The parties disagree, however, about whether club access would be a government endorsement of religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.

The Establishment Clause prohibits government speech endorsing religion while private speech in support of religion is protected by the Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses. With respect to equal access to limited public forums for religious groups, the Supreme Court typically finds no violation of the Establishment Clause where there is little concern that the public would perceive an endorsement of religion by the government entity and where any benefit to religion is merely incidental.

Limited Public Forum: The school's refusal to grant Club access to the limited public forum was based on a determination that the Club was religious in nature. The court, however, found that the school discriminated on the basis of viewpoint in violation of the Free Speech Clause. The court based its reasoning on two prior cases, Rosenberger and Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School Dist. 508 U.S. 384 (1993). Because of the finding of viewpoint discrimination, the issue of whether the restriction on speech was reasonable within the purpose of the school's limited public forum was not reached by the court.

Establishment Clause: The court determined that access to the school's facilities for the meetings of the Club would not have created an Establishment Clause violation. Factors contributing to the court's conclusion included the after school meeting time of the Club, the lack of school sponsorship of the Club, and the requirement that a child receive parental consent to attend the Club. In its reliance on these factors as safeguards against an Establishment Clause violation, the court relied on two prior decisions, Lamb's Chapel and Widmar v. Vincent 454 U.S. 263 (1981).

"Finally, even if we were to inquire into the minds of schoolchildren in this case, we cannot say the danger that children would misperceive the endorsement of religion is any greater than the danger that they would perceive a hostility toward the religious viewpoint if the Club were excluded from the public forum." (Justice Thomas)

"It is beyond question that Good News intends to use the public school premises not for the mere discussion of a subject from a particular, Christian point of view, but for an evangelical service of worship calling children to commit themselves in an act of Christian conversion. The majority avoids this reality only by resorting to the bland and general characterization of Good News's activity as "teaching of morals and character, from a religious standpoint." If the majority's statement ignores reality, as it surely does, then today's holding may be understood only in equally generic terms. Otherwise, indeed, this case would stand for the remarkable proposition that any public school opened for civic meetings must be opened for use as a church, synagogue, or mosque." (Justice Souter, dissenting)