Posted on 05/27/2005 7:46:41 AM PDT by SmithL
A federal judge has ordered Contra Costa County to let religious groups use its public rooms for meetings in a case involving the Antioch Library.
The county says use of its public spaces for religious purposes violates its policies and it will continue to fight a lawsuit demanding access.
Last year it banned a religious group from the community meeting room at the Antioch Library and the group went to court to assert its free speech rights.
U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White ruled this week that when the county makes available a room in a library, it cannot enforce a policy that bans religious purposes. His preliminary order issued Tuesday remains in effect while the parties continue to litigate the case.
The ruling affects libraries with meeting rooms managed by county library staffers. Libraries with meeting rooms managed by cities, such as Danville, San Ramon, Moraga and Orinda, are not affected, said Kelly Flanagan, a Contra Costa deputy counsel.
The attorney for the banned group was firm in her view and other free speech groups sided with her in comments made Thursday.
"It's unfair for the government to discriminate based on a person's viewpoint," said Elizabeth Murray, an attorney with the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund. The Defense Fund took up the case for Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries, which had sought to use the library room.
Faith Center sued last year after the county forbade it from using the library meeting room for its free, public meetings that include prayer, religious songs and Bible study.
A librarian who overheard the group's meeting last May informed officials, said county attorney Kelly Flanagan.
Flanagan said the county cannot allow a group to practice religion in space funded by taxpayers. The group's free speech is protected as long as taxes don't pay for it, she maintained.
Free speech group representatives offered little support for the county viewpoint.
The government cannot exclude groups "simply because they have a religious viewpoint," said Rob Boston, a spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that opposes religion in government.
"They had a policy from the get-go that discriminated against religious groups," he said. "We don't often agree with Alliance Defense Fund, but in this case, they have a point."
The head of an Oakland based free-speech group also agreed with White's injunction.
Until religious groups use a community room so often that it becomes a publicly funded place of worship, all groups should get equal access, said David Greene, executive director of the First Amendment Project.
"If a county library has opened its doors to other groups, it can't close its doors to religious groups," he said.
OMG....LOGIC prevailed.....do we have a trend starting? HOPING, praying.....
The attempt by the library to ban religious groups is wholly unconstitutional. Any lawyer worth his salt would know the status of the law- government bodies are required to treat religious groups the same way they treat secular groups. If the library allows the Birdwatching Association of California to use its meeting rooms (or whatever) it has to allow a Baptist youth group use on equal terms.
A more content based regulation would be hard to imagine.
(St. Paul, Minnesota is next)
U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White ... President Bush appointee. Speaks volumes doesn't it? Compare this with the Clintoon appointee who wants to release more pics of Abu Graib. Judge White is what we need more of!
If they do, I am filing suit.
Birds have a right to privacy too.
Tax money....Guess what...Catholics pay taxes, too.
I know that.
Was your reply misdirected?
The real interesting aspect of this story is that I'm SURPRISED by the judgment. That's more telling than anything else. I don't know how many of these piddly-butt cases go to court, but when I hear of them, I expect religion to lose.
The First Amendment does, indeed, contain that clause. Sadly -- and this is why the ruling is so very surprising and the ACLU's support of religious liberty here is so shocking -- in the eyes of the Liberals and the Atheists the Establishment Clause is seen as trumping and nullifying the Free Exercise Clause. Yes, I know, that's now how they articulate their position, but that's how it FUNCTIONS.
Yes, I was joking.
I wonder sometimes though if they might try it.
Too many to mention. It just shows me that the people who explored this great country and started cities were people with religious convictions.
Don't forget Sacramento. In addition, a huge number of California cities grew up around early missions, and include "Santa" or "San" in their names.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.