pages: RecreationandParkCommission/2017-12-14.pdf, 18
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
RecreationandParkCommission | 2017-12-14 | 18 | ANALYSIS 1. Denying Student Enrollment The first question presented for analysis is whether a private nonprofit religious school may deny admission to a student solely because the student's religious beliefs are in conflict with the religious beliefs of the school. We conclude that the school may do so. We note initially that a private nonprofit religious school is not part of the public school system required by the Constitution. (Cal. Const., art. IX, § 5.) If a private full-time day school has filed the requisite private school affidavit (see Ed. Code, § 33190), students attending the school are exempt from public school attendance (see Ed. Code, §§ 48200, 48222). We also note that a private school normally would not be subject to either the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution Footnote No. 1 or its California equivalents (Cal. Const., art. I, § 7). Footnote No. 2 As explained by the court in Air Line Pilots Ass'n v. Dept. of Aviation (7th Cir. 1995) 45 F.3d 1144, 1149: "As a general rule, the conduct of private parties lies beyond the Constitution's scope." The court, however, enumerated four situations where "governmental authority dominates an activity to such an extent that its participants must be deemed to act with the authority of the state, [and] constitutional restraints apply.' (Ibid.) These are (1) where there is a "symbiotic relationship' between the private actor and the state," (2) "where the state commands or encourages the private discriminatory action." (3) "when a private party carries on a traditional public function," and (4) "when the involvement of governmental authority aggravates or contributes to the unlawful conduct." (Ibid.) Of these four tests, it might superficially appear that a private religious school "carries on a traditional public function" for purposes of constitutional analysis. However, this test is applicable only when the state delegates to a private party public functions under circumstances that leave no alternative source of benefits for its citizens. (See Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks (1978) 436 U.S. 149, 157-164.) Such is not the case with respect to private schools, religious or otherwise; California has its own system of public schools for its citizens. Accordingly, we find no constitutional impediment under the equal protection clause with respect to a private nonprofit religious school denying admission to a prospective student solely because his or her religious beliefs are inconsistent with the religious beliefs of the school. Indeed, we find constitutional language that generally protects the school's decision to exclude those who do not subscribe to its religious beliefs. The "religion clauses" are contained in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof Footnote No. 3 California has its own constitutional counterparts: "Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed The Legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion " (Cal. Const., art. I, § 4.) | RecreationandParkCommission/2017-12-14.pdf |