Liberty Counsel had a case such as the one Marc describes. It settled favorably.
Here is the Liberty Counsel press release concerning the settlement of the case: "January 29, 2008 School Board Settles Lawsuit By Amending Policy and Accepting Student’s Community Service Hours at Church Long Beach, CA – The Long Beach District School Board has approved a settlement agreement with Christopher Rand, a high school student who was denied credit for community service hours he completed at his church. Chris has now received full credit for the hours. The district administration also rewrote its community service learning policy to allow students to complete mandatory community service hours at either secular or religious organizations, including churches, on the same terms. In October 2007, Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit against the district because Chris’s school refused to grant credit for more than 70 hours of community service, solely because it was performed at Long Beach Alliance Church. He interacted with the children in the church’s programs, answered questions, assisted with crafts and art projects, supervised activity time to help ensure safety, and performed other duties. After Chris submitted the required documentation regarding his volunteer service, he was denied credit because the district’s prior community service learning policy stated, “Service to your religious community does not count.” If Christopher had given the same service in a secular school or in a nonreligious childcare program, his service would have been credited. Shortly after Liberty Counsel filed suit, the district agreed to award Chris credit for the full 72.5 hours that had previously been rejected. In addition to giving Chris credit for his community service, the district accepted input from Liberty Counsel in revising its policy to comply with the First Amendment. Under the new policy, religious organizations will receive the same treatment as other nonprofit organizations in terms of the types of community service work that is permitted. Students are expressly allowed to supervise and assist with leading organized children’s activities, such as those performed by Chris. The district also agreed to pay attorney’s fees and costs to Liberty Counsel. Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: “When community service is a graduation requirement, schools cannot limit service to secular venues. Discrimination against performing community service for religious organizations violates the First Amendment and offends the rich religious heritage that made this country great.”" Rick Duncan Welpton Professor of Law University of Nebraska College of Law Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 --- On Tue, 5/5/09, Marc Stern <mst...@ajcongress.org> wrote: From: Marc Stern <mst...@ajcongress.org> Subject: RE: Bowman v. U.S. To: hamilto...@aol.com, "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 7:25 AM Would the result be the same if a school required community service, but prohibited students from fulfilling that obligation in a religious setting, or excluding say Sunday school teaching from the list of permissible placements? Marc Stern -----Original Message----- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of hamilto...@aol.com Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 7:51 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Bowman v. U.S. While speech is involved in the classroom, career preparation is more involved than just speech. The state is not simply handing out funds for the sheer joy of learning or enriching discourse. The state funding of ministers or rabbis for that matter is a direct and knowing benefit to religious institutions. That is different from the abstract treatment of learning as nothing but a discourse of speech. Marci ------Original Message------ From: Volokh, Eugene Sender: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics ReplyTo: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Sent: May 4, 2009 7:41 PM Subject: RE: Bowman v. U.S. What exactly is it about government-funded education directed at future careers that keeps it from being "pure speech"? It presumably wouldn't just be the government funding, since that was at issue in Rosenberger as well. I take it the theory must be that "education" is somehow more than just "pure speech," in constitutionally significant ways. But why, especially when we're talking about education that basically just involves talking, rather than science labs, football games, and the like? Marci Hamilton writes: > In any event, this is not pure speech -- it is government funding education directed > at future careers. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
