This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A federal appeals court is scheduled on Monday to hear about the discrimination used by the University of Maine system against a Christian church which won a bid to purchase disused school property, but then was rejected because of its beliefs.

A report from Liberty Counsel, which is working on behalf of Calvary Chapel Belfast, explained the lower court claimed that it was fine for the school system to cancel the church's winning bid "despite evidence of religious animus and numerous irregularities in the bidding process."

"Calvary Chapel Belfast rightfully won the University of Maine System's first bidding process, and the appeals court will have the chance to ensure the university honors that bid," explained Liberty Counsel chief Mat Staver. "The church participated in the bidding process in good faith, but UMS then unlawfully rescinded their winning bid due to its religious beliefs after community backlash but under the excuse of procedural deficiencies. Such discrimination is unlawful, and an injunction is necessary to restore the church's bid award and stop these unconstitutional actions."

The fight started several years ago, when in November 2024, the church fought back when school officials rescinded the winning bid for the Hutchinson Center.

The rescission was because of "public, legislative, and donor outcry over" the Christian beliefs of the church.

The church sought an injunction, and Liberty Counsel argued on its behalf that UMS officials deviated from their bidding procedures, accepted invalid appeals form the losers, and "cited relocating an Internet hub from the building as a 'cost-avoidance deficiency' as the reason for rescinding the initial award."

Liberty Counsel explained, "Subsequently, UMS held a second, rigged bidding process that awarded the building to a secular bidder."

Despite evidence, the legal team noted, Stacey Neumann, a judge, rejected the request for an injunction.

Pending now is the argument from Liberty Counsel that "decisions from at least four other appeals courts make clear that when adverse government actions follow in sequence after 'bigoted community opposition,' any 'direct and circumstantial evidence' of discriminatory intent is 'valid.'"

All that's needed for problems to occur is for the government decisionmaker to "knowingly act on the objections" of those who are intentionally discriminating.

"The record shows that [UMS] acted in the wake of extraordinary religiously motivated opposition from UMaine donors, faculty, alumni, and the disappointed bidders," wrote Liberty Counsel. "By granting an appeal from a losing bidder that was highly 'infected' with religious animus, as well as overruling its own procurement experts, and disregarding the competitive negotiated procurement process, UMS made a decision that resulted in religious discrimination," the legal team said.