News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
June 23, 2005
While many colleges bar discrimination against gay people, many religious colleges do not, because their anti-bias regulations do not cover sexual orientation.
Seton Hall University, a Roman Catholic institution, is an exception. Its anti-bias policy specifically covers sexual orientation. And that set the stage for an unusual legal dispute over the university’s right to assert its religious identity in denying recognition to a gay student group.
A New Jersey court had been poised to allow a suit against the university go forward. But an appeals court ruled Wednesday that Seton Hall was within its rights to deny recognition to the group.
The suit was brought by Anthony Romeo, a gay student at Seton Hall who says that he enrolled there in part because of the university’s nondiscrimination policy. When he was denied the right to create a gay student group, he sued under New Jersey’s anti-discrimination laws and for breach of contract. Typically, religious colleges are exempt from bias regulations that conflict with their religious views, so Catholic colleges are exempt from requirements that they treat gay people equally.
Romeo’s argument was that Seton Hall gave up that right when it pledged not to discriminate against gay people.
But the appeals court said otherwise. It cited a series of rulings in other courts that in essence make it impossible for a religious institution to give up its right to invoke its religious status. As a result, the court dismissed the suit, saying that it did not want to question the university’s “fundamental religious ideals.”
Thomas White, a spokesman for Seton Hall, said that the decision “affirms that religious organizations are legally permitted to act in accordance with their doctrines.”
He said it was unfair to hold Seton Hall to a higher standard than other religious colleges because of its anti-bias policies. “We don’t allow discrimination in admissions and hiring,” he said. “We want our gay and lesbian students to feel comfortable on campus, but we also have to balance that with the mission and goals of being a Catholic institution.”
Thomas D. Shanahan, Romeo’s lawyer, said that the court’s ruling would allow religious colleges to ignore their own policies any time they wanted. “Students should be able to hold a university to its own policy,” he said.
Shanahan said he was planning to appeal to New Jersey’s Supreme Court. He said that there would be no case if Seton Hall had not pledged not to discriminate. But he said that Romeo probably would have gone elsewhere and Seton Hall wouldn’t have had him as a student.
“He made a decision based on how the school represented itself,” Shanahan said. “It’s a huge double standard for Seton Hall then to discriminate.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Seton Hall has the right to remain silent. Seton Hall has the right to a lawyer. Seton Hall has the right to refuse to accept funds from the State of New Jersey.
If Seton Hall wants the right to refuse to allow LGBT students to form clubs on campus, it has the responsibility to inform applicants of this policy. Were LGBT students notified that Seton Hall will deny them the right to form a student club, LGBT students might prefer to attend a university where they can be free to form an organization to provide mutual support and the opportunity to learn about their history, traditions, and experiences. That is, LGBT students might choose to attend a real university instead of one that suppresses the creation and transmission of knowledge.
Ken Sherrill, Professor at Hunter College, CUNY, at 1:58 pm EDT on June 23, 2005
I can only imagine that if the suit had been decided the other way, Seton Hall (or perhaps some other religious college in a similar position) would just have revoked its non-discrimination policy. So this decision at least helps make it more feasible for religious groups to move towards moderation, which seems to be a good thing in general.
Kenny Easwaran, PhD Student at UC Berkeley, at 4:37 am EDT on June 24, 2005
Why would a gay person choose to enroll at a Catholic college? There may be some good reason but I would really like to know. I guess if you read in the catalogue that there was a policy of non-discrimination against gays that would be partially enticing, but what about all the other evidence? Actually, why would anyone want to enroll at any church related institution? I really would like to know.
Vincent, at 7:21 pm EDT on June 27, 2005
kenny...that is not true as, at least for this one guy, they would have to uphold their policy of nondiscrimination towards gays as at the time he enrolled it was active and it was one of the propoganda (not in a negative sense) they used to get people to enroll in their institution.
vincint...have you thought that perhaps many people who are very religious, such as christian, do not see why being gay is incompatible to their religion? many people believe this, and so they would want to encorporate their religion, which is very important to them, into their education. so he picked that institution because it was in tune with his religion (catholism) while having also explicitly stated that they did not discriminate in terms of sexual orientation. i believe i also answered your question of why go to any religious-affiliated higher-ed institution there too; it is a fundamental aspect to the lives of many people, and they wish to encorporate it into they’re education and make it a major perspective in the way that they view and are taught their education.
i disagree fundamentally with the ruling; at the point where an institution explicitly states they will not discriminate on the basis on sexual orientation, and someone has chosen them because of that, it is both a breach of contract (nondiscrimination being a gaurentee in him enrolling in the institution) and it is illegal, as all religious doctrines are open to much interpretation. for instance, look at the jihad theory in islam. some poeple see it as a physical stuggle if they or their religion is attacked, some see it as a physical stuggle if other people are not islamic and so disagree with their religion inherently (think suicide bombers), some see it as only using words to persuade those who verbally attack the religion and some see it as a mental stuggle against things that the religion prohibits (think being an alcoholic, for instance)....pretty different, huh? it is impossible to rule that all must abide under one interpretation, as that inherently restricts their right of free and uncoerced religion.
maya, at 4:35 am EST on November 18, 2005
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Western Carolina University seeks to create an integrated approach to the college experiences of our first year students. The ... see job
The Coordinator of Student Activites is responsible for overseeing the planning and implementation of a comprehensive, ... see job
Assistant to the Vice President for Business Affairs for Legal Services to provide legal services to UTB/TSC administration ... see job
Western Carolina University, a regional comprehensive university targeted for enrollment growth as part of the University of ... see job
The Residence Director/Program Coordinator is a full-time, 10 month position with a half-time appointment each in both the ... see job
A private non-profit educational institution in the Watts-Willowbrook area of South Los Angeles, Charles Drew University of ... see job
Job Description: The Assistant Director is second in command of the largest Law Enforcement Training Center in South Florida, ... see job
The San Diego Community College District is accepting applications to fill the position of Equal Opportunity and Diversity ... see job
Bachelor’s degree required, preferably in Communication, Education, or Public Relations. A minimum of one year of ... see job
Exciting Attorney Job Opportunity at The George Washington University. see job
As a gay Jewish man I agree with this ruling.Religious organizations should have the right to descriminate if they believe it fits within their moral codes. Obviously Catholics believe descrimination is acceptable in practice but not in printed words.
scott gansl, at 1:27 pm EDT on June 23, 2005