"This is a significant case for the hundreds of small church groups and clubs around the country that currently hold meetings or events in public schools and halls," says Mitchell Tyner
An organization should not be denied the use of public facilities simply because it is a religious group, say lawyers arguing on behalf of the “Good News Club” in a case currently pending in the United States Supreme Court.
“This is a significant case for the hundreds of small church groups and clubs around the country that currently hold meetings or events in public schools and halls,” says Mitchell Tyner, an associate in the Office of General Counsel for the Adventist Church worldwide. “Where do these groups go if they can’t afford their own facilities and they are denied access to their usual meeting places?”
The Good News Club dispute was sparked by the refusal of Milford Central School, located in New York State, to allow a Christian youth group to use school facilities for after-hours meetings.
Tyner says that the Adventist Church became involved in the case as an amici, or “friend of the court,” because it believes that religious groups have the right to be treated with “fundamental fairness” in the public sphere; to have access to public facilities on the same basis as other groups.
“The implications of this case go beyond the mere issue of using school property,” explains Tyner. “As a church, we have long supported the constitutional principle that the state should not endorse religious activity, either explicitly or implicitly. But, on the other hand, we also believe that this principle does not mandate state hostility toward religious groups.”
Lawyers for the Good News Club argue that it is unfair to deny religious groups access to buildings and facilities that have been funded by taxpayers and that are available to other community groups.
“These religious groups have as much right as other taxpayers to use the facilities,” says Adventist attorney Nicholas Miller. Miller, who co-wrote the amicus brief filed in support of the Good News Club, adds that, “As long as the religious programs are not sponsored or promoted by the state, and the religious groups do not receive preferred treatment over other groups,” there is no danger that the government is “establishing” religion, thus contravening the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Court is expected to hear argument in the case within the next 90 days and an outcome is likely before July 1, 2001.
