Court rules Texas school can forbid gay student club from meeting on campus

Federal judge upholds school's policy restricting discussions of sexual activity

© 2004 Student Press Law Center

March 8, 2004

TEXAS — A federal court has ruled that Lubbock Independent School District can restrict students' promotion of sex and sexuality in school-sponsored activities without violating their First Amendment right to free speech.

U.S. District Judge Sam R. Cummings ruled March 3 that the district's "abstinence-only" policy "restricting any discussion of sexual activity and birth control other than abstinence does not violate the First Amendment."

Two Lubbock High School students sued the school district after school officials denied their requests to promote the Lubbock Gay-Straight Alliance in school and to hold meetings on campus. The students sought permission from the school in September 2002 to advertise their organization's off-campus meetings by posting fliers and using the school's public announcement system, as did other student groups, according to court documents. The group's members then asked the school principal and assistant superintendent for permission to meet on campus in December 2002. Both requests were denied.

The court found that the school's actions did not constitute an attempt to silence a particular viewpoint, which the First Amendment would have prohibited. Rather, the court said the school's restrictions were reasonable efforts to enforce its abstinence-only sex discussion policy.

The court was concerned about the organization's Web site — mentioned on its fliers — which included links to Web sites that discussed sex and sexuality.

"This case has nothing to do with a denial of rights to students because of their sexual viewpoint," Cummings wrote in his decision. "It is an assertion of a school's right not to surrender control of the public school system to students and erode a community's standard of what subject matter is considered obscene and inappropriate."

The court cited the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, which allows high school administrators to censor some school-sponsored student publications by showing they have a legitimate educational reason for doing so. In his ruling, Cummings quoted Hazelwood, saying that "a school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission, even though the government could not censor similar speech outside of school."

Cummings' ruling suggests administrators at the school could also prohibit school-sponsored newspapers from publishing articles that conflict with the school's abstinence-only policy.

"If kids aren't allowed to discuss the benefits of fact-based sexual education, then the school has censored the people who are in best position to criticize school policy," Brain Chase, the students' lawyer, said of student journalists.

Chase, an attorney from Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a national gay civil-rights organization, argued that the school district cannot deny the Gay-Straight Alliance the right to meet on campus simply because of the district's abstinence-only policy.

"The judge seemed convinced this club was all about discussing sex, which isn't true," Chase said. "The kids listed many goals, [including discussing] discrimination and bullying, and the judge didn't mention any of those."

Ann Manning, the school district's lawyer, said the district was pleased by the ruling because the court upheld the school's abstinence-only policy. She said the abstinence-only policy does not discriminate against gay students because it applies to all students.

Manning would not discuss how the district's abstinence-only policy affects student journalists.

The students have not decided whether they will appeal the ruling, Chase said.

Share

For More Information: Caudillo v. Lubbock Indep. School District, 5:03-CV-165-C (Northern Dist. Texas, March 3, 2004)

< Return to Previous Page