THE GOOD NEWS CLUB, ANDREA FOURNIER and DARLEEN FOURNIER,

Plaintiffs- v. -

MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL,Defendant

Presented/Synthesized by:Lauren Bauer and Maureen

Schabel

This is a case about perceived discrimination

against religious expression and religious practice.

Meet Stephen and Darlene Fournier, and their daughter Andrea

Community Use Policy: holding social, civic and recreational

meetings and entertainment events that are pertaining to the welfare of the community

provided that such uses shall be nonexclusive and shall be open to the general public

the policy explicitly says that the school premises will not be used by any individual or organization for religious purposes

Facts of the case

The Fourniers sought approval to use

the school building for the Good News Club

The Fourniers submitted a request to hold the Club's weekly afterschool meetings at the school

Milford denied the request The Club filed suit the denial violated:

First Fourteenth Amendments.

Facts of the case

Congress shall make no law

respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

First Amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Fourteenth Amendment

Initially, the United States District

Court found for the Club Then in August 1998, the district court

ruled against the club The Fourniers’ then appealed a

decision in favor of defendant-appellee Milford Central School

Next, the club appealed to the Second Circuit Court

United States Supreme Court agreed to review the ruling

Legal Procedural History

Decision: 6 votes for

Good News Club, 3 vote(s) against

Legal provision: Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly

Supreme Court

Yes votes: Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer

No votes: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg

1st AMENDMENT:

Speech is speech, regardless of the topic. 14th AMENDMENT:

The Good News Club is allowed the same rights and privileges as any other person or club.

ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: The First Amendment's Establishment

Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

If another club is allowed to meet using the school facilities, the Good News Club should also be allowed the same permission.

Main legal issues

The court decided the use policy of the district discriminates on the basis of religion, since: It would be impossible to sort out which

activities of the club, and which words, fall where, in terms of religious v. secular moral development

The exclusion message of involving children relating their learning in the club to a school endorsement found to be nonsensical.

Allowing non-religious groups to use facilities but not allowing for religious purposes was discriminatory.

That the school district had no “animus” (intent to do harm) toward the Good News Club

Court holdings

When the Good News Club is

compared to: The Full Gospel Tabernacle in Full

Gospel Tabernacle v. Community School District #27 (1998)

In Bronx Household of Faith v. Community School District No. 10 (1997)

Milford’s Community Use policy does allow such clubs and the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and 4-H Clubs to meet in their facilities.

In Lamb’s Chappel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District (1993),

Rationale

QUESTIONS?

Be Prepared for the Good News…