Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
I think I found a more on-point case anyhow: Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale, 120 S.Ct. 2446 (2000). It held:
So that doesn't really answer the question as to whether Maryland's student code of conduct can do what it's being used to do, though I think if you asked Kappa Alpha Psi's HQ (and here I am just speculating) that they'd probably not think that the forced inclusion of this individual would necessarily impair their ability to advocate public or private viewpoints, except those viewpoints which were discussed in the OP, which I'm guessing Kappa Alpha Psi's HQ would definitely not endorse.
At any rate, there is no forced inclusion happening here. The organization is placed on probation, not even double-secret probation. I doubt they'll be dumb enough to talk about sexual orientation discrimination via social media again.
|
There are two issues at play here, and in the case that dukeguy seems to be talking about. The first is whether the government can tell a private association how it must select members. That's the question
Dale addresses, and it says "no, the government can't."
The second question is whether the government can choose treat organizations that discriminate differently from those that don't—whether in the context of a school denying or limiting recognition or in the context of a city denying the organization permission to participate in a parade. The answer to that second question is murky for me.
In other words, an organization has the right to choose its members and set its criteria for membership. But does it also have a right to expect public accommodation if those criteria are contrary to public policy?
Threaded Mode
