A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today said the City of San Diego can continue leasing the Boy Scouts of America lower-than-normal rents in Balboa Park even though the BSA bars atheists and gays.
The Desert Pacific Council, a nonprofit corporation chartered by the Boy Scouts of America, leases land — at a cost of $1 a year — from the City of San Diego for a camp and an aquatic center.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in reversing a lower court’s decision Thursday, said that any aid the city was providing to religion through the leases was “incidental” and that San Diego wasn’t “engaged in religious indoctrination” or “defining aid recipients by reference to religion,” in violation of either state or federal law.
The unanimous ruling, which overturned a district court decision, said the city did not discriminate in its rental policies or bear any financial hardship under the terms of its leases to the Boy Scouts.
The decision stemmed from a lawsuit filed over a decade ago brought by a Lesbian and agnostic parents saying the leases of public land to groups that discriminate violated the U.S. Constitution and similar provisions in the state Constitution that limit public aid to religious groups
“There is no evidence that the city’s purpose in leasing the subject properties to the Boy Scouts was to advance religion, and there is abundant evidence that its purpose was to provide facilities and services for youth activities,” Judge William C. Canby Jr., a President Carter appointee, wrote for the unanimous panel.
The court went on to say “We conclude that the Camp Balboa and Youth Aquatic Center leases do not violate the No Aid Clause of the California Constitution because the leases constitute, at most, indirect or incidental aid by the City for a religious purpose, and the aid does not otherwise violate the requirements established by the Supreme Court of California to avoid invalidity under the No Aid Clause.”
The court also concluded “the leases do not violate either the California No Preference Clause or the state and federal Establishment Clauses. We accordingly reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs, and remand with instructions to grant summary judgment to the Council on the state and federal constitutional claims. We also affirm the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims under the state and federal Equal Protection Clauses.”
Lastly, the appeals court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims the City had violated its own San Diego Human Rights Ordinance when it issued the lease to the Scouts.
Local Boy Scout officials issued a statement to volunteers calling the ruling “a tremendous victory for the council, for Scouting, and, most of all, for the youth of San Diego.”
There was no immediate statement from the plaintiffs in the case.
