This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A California municipality that decided it would allow just about anybody to rent its public facilities – except anyone who wanted to have a religious gathering – has reversed itself.
Word of the change in the practice by the City of Manhattan Beach comes from the American Center for Law and Justice, which had protested the discriminatory practice that targeted residents of faith.
It was the city's facilities use policies that specifically stated any religious gathering was banned.
The policy, before the recent change, specifically stated: "The Facility Reservation Policy governs use of public facilities such as community center rooms, picnic shelters, swimming pools, basketball courts and sports fields that are available to the public for civic, social, educational, athletic, cultural activities and limited commercial use. The purpose of this policy is to provide use regulations and application and scheduling procedures to accommodate residents and individuals who would like to use City facilities. Facilities will not be used for religious worship or other religious purposes, political fundraisers, political advocacy or other partisan campaign events, or the sale of goods or services. Candidate or ballot issue forums that present all opposing viewpoints may be accepted."
A client being assisted by the ACLJ had asked to reserve a city facility for an event to sing worship songs and watch a sermon on television.
City officials refused.
"Meanwhile, residents were permitted to use the same facilities for non-religious purposes. Such a broad prohibition preventing any religious gathering solely because it's religious clearly violates the First Amendment," the legal team pointed out.
So it dispatched a letter to the city explaining its obligations under the Constitution.
The ACLJ said, "The First Amendment limits the government's ability to censor free speech and religious expression. The First Amendment especially protects religious speech and expression. As the Supreme Court has said, '[P]rivate religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression.' The government cannot suppress speech solely because it is religious."
The city didn't respond to the ACLJ's demand letter, but when it started preparing a complaint based on violations of the First and 14th Amendments, officials suddenly reached out and announced plans to amend their requirements.
"We're happy to report that during the Manhattan Beach City Council's August meeting, the amendment was considered and passed. This is a tremendous victory for our client. By a unanimous vote, the city removed the language banning all 'religious worship or other religious purposes,'" the ACLJ said.
The new policy, now on the city's web page, confirms that those uses are not included in a list of prohibitions.
WND reported the Supreme Court, "In Widmar v. Vincent held a 'university policy denying a religious student club access to its facilities on equal terms violated the First Amendment.' Then in Lamb's Chapel, the justices said, 'where the government opens up public facilities to a variety of groups, religious groups must be treated equally under the First Amendment.'"
It was the same city, WND reported, that also recently canceled its prohibition on Bible studies in homes. That change came about after one resident was threatened with zoning violations.
