Boy scouts of america v. dale
Case name: Boy Scouts of America and Monmouth Council, et al v. James Dale
Year decided: 2000
Result: 5-4, in favor of Boy Scouts of America
Related constitutional issue/amendment: First Amendment (freedom of assembly and speech)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court held that the Boy Scouts of America has a constitutional right to prohibit homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. The Boy Scouts of America stated that the presence of a gay troop leader "would, at the very least, force the organization to send a message, both to the young members and the world, that the Boy Scouts accepts homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior." The Court found that New Jersey's public accommodations law violates the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association. The Boy Scouts of America is allowed to refuse membership on the basis of sexual orientation.
Quote from majority opinion: "We are not, as we must not be, guided by our views of whether the Boy Scouts’ teachings with respect to homosexual conduct are right or wrong; public or judicial disapproval of a tenet of an organization’s expression does not justify the State’s effort to compel the organization to accept members where such acceptance would derogate from the organization’s expressive message."
Summary of the dissent: The meaning of the Scout Law and Oath do not specifically state that homosexuality is inconsistent with the values taught in the Scout Law and Oath and therefore cannot be used to bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. BSA only took a clear stance on homosexuality and altered its policies after the expulsion of Dale. "The creation of a constitutional shield for a policy" will only encourage prejudice against homosexuals.
Six-word summary: Discrimination based on sexual orientation permitted.
Year decided: 2000
Result: 5-4, in favor of Boy Scouts of America
Related constitutional issue/amendment: First Amendment (freedom of assembly and speech)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court held that the Boy Scouts of America has a constitutional right to prohibit homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. The Boy Scouts of America stated that the presence of a gay troop leader "would, at the very least, force the organization to send a message, both to the young members and the world, that the Boy Scouts accepts homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior." The Court found that New Jersey's public accommodations law violates the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association. The Boy Scouts of America is allowed to refuse membership on the basis of sexual orientation.
Quote from majority opinion: "We are not, as we must not be, guided by our views of whether the Boy Scouts’ teachings with respect to homosexual conduct are right or wrong; public or judicial disapproval of a tenet of an organization’s expression does not justify the State’s effort to compel the organization to accept members where such acceptance would derogate from the organization’s expressive message."
Summary of the dissent: The meaning of the Scout Law and Oath do not specifically state that homosexuality is inconsistent with the values taught in the Scout Law and Oath and therefore cannot be used to bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. BSA only took a clear stance on homosexuality and altered its policies after the expulsion of Dale. "The creation of a constitutional shield for a policy" will only encourage prejudice against homosexuals.
Six-word summary: Discrimination based on sexual orientation permitted.