CLS v. WALKER: FAQS

The de-recognized Christian Legal Society student organization at Southern Illinois University has addressed the following questions:

Q: Is CLS at SIU seeking to exclude non-Christians and homosexuals from its chapter meetings?

A: No. Absolutely not. CLS meetings and events have been and are open to all members of the Southern Illinois University law school community regardless of religious belief, sexual orientation or membership in any other protected classification. Indeed, CLS welcomes such persons to our meetings and events. CLS only requires that its officers and formal voting members subscribe to the CLS Statement of Faith, a statement of basic Christian beliefs generally considered orthodox in both the Protestant and Catholic faiths.

Q: What is the difference between CLS attendees and CLS members?

A: The primary distinction between members and attendees in CLS is that only members may vote and stand for office.

Q: Does CLS bar from membership and leadership persons who have engaged in homosexual conduct in the past, but choose to no longer do so?

A: No. CLS interprets this Statement of Faith to require that members and leaders adhere to orthodox Christian beliefs, including the Bible’s prohibition of sexual conduct between persons of the same sex. Thus, a person who engages in homosexual conduct or adheres to the viewpoint that homosexual conduct is not sinful would not be permitted to serve as an officer or become a member of CLS at SIU. However, a person who may have engaged in homosexual conduct in the past but has repented of that conduct, or who has homosexual inclinations but does not engage in or affirm homosexual conduct, would not be prevented from becoming a member or serving as an officer.

Q: Why does CLS at SIU make an issue of homosexual conduct, and not other sexual or other sins?

A: It is the law school’s intolerance for religious disagreement about homosexual conduct, not CLS at SIU’s stance that has instigated this conflict. Moreover, CLS at SIU does not single out homosexual conduct as a “special sin.” If the law school prohibited the chapter from excluding unrepentant adulterers from its voting membership and leadership, the chapter would object just as strongly as it has here. It is the law school that has chosen to force the chapter to set aside its religious convictions as to one form of conduct we believe to be contrary to scripture.

Q: Under what university or law school policy was the chapter sanctioned?

A: According to the letter from Dean Alexander derecognizing the chapter, the chapter’s membership and leadership policies violate the University’s Affirmative Action/Equal Employment Opportunity Policy. That policy states:

It is the policy of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale to provide equal employment and education opportunities for all qualified persons without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, status as a disabled veteran or a veteran of the Vietnam era, sexual orientation, or marital status.

CLS at SIU hires no one and has no employment policies or practices of any kind. Dean Alexander’s letter also cited a Board of Trustees policy that requires recognized student organizations to “adhere[] to all appropriate federal or state laws concerning nondiscrimination and equal opportunity….” The letter omits any mention of any state or federal law that would govern the chapter’s membership and leadership policies and we are aware of none.

Q: Why doesn’t CLS at SIU just change its “official” membership and leadership policies until a non-Christian or an unrepentant homosexual challenges it by seeking membership or officership?

A: We refuse to be dishonest with the University and we will not compromise our religious beliefs. Further, making false statements to the university about our membership and leadership policies could subject the chapter or its members and officers to discipline by the law school or university.

Q: If CLS at SIU succeeds, would it mean that other nonreligious student organizations could refuse to allow Christians or members of other faiths as members or leaders?

A: No. CLS is challenging the policy only as applied to it and other religious student organizations. Thus, if CLS prevails, the university would only be prohibited from applying the religion and sexual orientation provisions against CLS and other religious student organizations. Other student organizations, (i.e. club sports, social fraternities, and political student groups) would still be bound by any applicable nondiscrimination policies and CLS at SIU would still be bound by all other provisions of any applicable nondiscrimination policies.

Q: Why should religious student organizations be able to “discriminate” on the basis of religion and sexual conduct when other groups cannot?

A: “Discrimination” is prohibited in the law largely because it is deemed irrelevant to a person’s ability to do a certain thing (be employed, purchase a home, etc.). There is a substantial difference between religious (including Biblically-based conduct) requirements for membership and leadership in a religious student organization and such requirements for chess clubs or the Student Republicans. An individual’s religious beliefs and agreement with Biblical standards of conduct are highly relevant to their membership in and leadership of a religious organization, but such requirements are irrelevant to their membership in or leadership of an environmental club or a club soccer team. Other federal laws understand this distinction. For example, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 exempts religious employers like churches from its ban on religious discrimination in employment.

Q: How is CLS harmed by having non-Christians and practicing homosexuals as members or leaders?

A: CLS at SIU is an “expressive association” under the First Amendment. Its members have joined together to encourage each other in their Christian faith and to demonstrate and dialogue with other students about how the Christian faith relates to the legal profession and the law. If CLS at SIU is forced to permit nonbelievers or those who do not believe in the same standards of Biblical moral conduct to serve as officers or members it would lose its witness as a distinct Biblically-based Christian fellowship. Indeed, such persons could even cause the chapter to take positions on matters of concern at SIU that are not in keeping with the present members’ religious beliefs.

Q: Wouldn’t the law school be endorsing CLS at SIU’s religious beliefs if it exempted the chapter from the nondiscrimination policy?

A: No. Recognition of CLS at SIU would confer no more endorsement on our chapter’s beliefs than does SIU School of Law’s recognition of the Law School Republicans or Law School Democrats. The law school does not endorse the views or beliefs of any student organization at Southern Illinois University School of Law merely because it permits it to use law school facilities or because it receives other benefits from the law school. Cases like Widmar v. Vincent and Rosenberger v. Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia make this plain. If law school recognition of a student group necessarily meant that the law school endorsed a student organization’s beliefs, recognition of religious student organizations would always be prohibited by the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court’s cases demonstrate that this is not the case.