child evan fell commplaint

7/29/2019 Child Evan Fell Commplaint

1/27

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Action No. VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND

Child Evangelism Fellowship DECLARATORY RELIEF

of Dauphin County, Inc.

Plaintiff,v.

Harrisburg School District

Defendant.

This action is not related to any previously filed case in this Court. Pursuant

to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Child Evangelism Fellowship

alleges as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This is a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and the First and

Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution brought to remedy a

violation of the constitutional rights of Child Evangelism Fellowship of Dauphin

County, Inc. (Child Evangelism Fellowship), which offers a community-led,

Case 1:13-cv-00330-CCC Document 1 Filed 02/08/13 Page 1 of 27


2/27

2

after-school Bible club that had met at Foose Elementary School and other schools

in the Harrisburg School District (the District).

2. Plaintiff brings this action challenging the Districts policy, both on its face

and as applied, of excluding Plaintiff from a category of community groups which

receive fee waivers for the use of facilities after school hours, thereby imposing

such fees upon Plaintiff in a discriminatory manner.

3. Such groups are designated as Class III Community Service Groups

according to District policy No. 707 pertaining to the Use of School Facilities (the

Policy). Such groups are to be non-profit organizations that provide services to

the communities within the Harrisburg School District and include Boys and Girls

Club of Harrisburg, community recreation organizations, and other non-profit

community service groups. Class III organizations will be provided use of district

facilities without charge. The Policy (a true and correct copy of which is attached

hereto as Exhibit 1).

4. Even though the Good News Clubs that Child Evangelism Fellowship

offers fit squarely within this definition, the District has applied the Policy to

exclude Child Evangelism Fellowship from Class III status, therefore requiring

Plaintiff to pay for the afterschool use of the Districts facilities.

5. As a result, Plaintiff has been deprived of access on equal terms to after-



3/27

3

school use of the Districts facilities, and has effectively been excluded, due to

cost, from the entire District since the beginning of the 2012-2013 school year.

6. In depriving Plaintiff access on equal terms, the District applied its Policy in

an unconstitutional manner, thereby violating the free speech, free exercise, due

process, and equal protection clauses of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to

the United States Constitution.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7. This action arises under the United States Constitution, particularly the First

and the Fourteenth Amendments, and, under federal law, particularly 28 U.S.C.

2201-02, 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988.

8. This Court possesses original jurisdiction over Plaintiffs claims by

operation of 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1343.

9. This Court is vested with authority to issue the requested declaratory relief

under 28 U.S.C. 2201-02, and pursuant to Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

10.This Court has authority to award the requested injunctive relief under Rule

65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 1343(3).

11.This Court is authorized to award nominal damages under 28 U.S.C.

1343(4).

12.This Court is authorized to award attorneys fees under 42 U.S.C. 1988.



4/27

4

13.Under 28 U.S.C. 1391, venue is proper in the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Pennsylvania because these claims arose there and all

parties reside within the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

III. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PLAINTIFF

14.Plaintiff is a non-profit, community-led Christian organization that offers

Good News Clubs to District elementary school students after school, free of

charge. These clubs are open to all students, regardless of the race, gender, or

religious beliefs of the student. Children are provided good role models and a safe

place to go after school, as well as instruction in learning responsibility, virtue, and

maturity through Bible stories, songs and games. Permission to attend must be

granted by a students parent or legal guardian.

15.Child Evangelism Fellowship has been offering Good News Clubs at

Foose Elementary School since the 2007-2008 academic year, elsewhere in the

Harrisburg School District since the 2006-2007 academic year, and in other school

districts throughout Dauphin County since the late 1980s. Its sister organizations

have been offering such clubs across the United States since 1937.

16.Plaintiff, pursuant to its sincerely held religious belief in sharing the gospel

with these students, desires to be granted access on equal terms to the Districts

school facilities, including those at Foose Elementary School, as a forum for

offering its Good News Clubs to students. To that end Plaintiff desires to be



5/27

5

recognized as a Class III Community Service Group, so as to avoid paying the

prohibitively expensive facilities fee.

IV. IDENTIFICATION OF THE DEFENDANT

17.According to the Public School Code of 1949, Defendant District is a body

corporate organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 24

P.S. 2-211.

18.An action shall be brought by or against a political subdivision in its

name. Pa. R.C.P. No. 2102(b).

19.A school district is a political subdivision. Pa. R.C.P. No. 76.

20.The District is charged, inter alia, with the administration, operation, and

supervision of all District schools, including Foose Elementary.

21.The District is charged with the formulation, adoption, implementation, and

enforcement of District policies, including the Policy herein challenged.

22.The District is responsible for the enactment, enforcement, and existence of

policies and practices related to community groups use of facilities and their

payment therefor.

23.The District used its unfettered discretion to exclude Plaintiff from Class III

Community Service Group status, thereby prohibiting access on equal terms to its

facilities.

24.The District is responsible for District officials, including the School Board



6/27

6

Secretarys and Superintendents, application of its Policy pertaining to the

payment of fees.

25.The District is also responsible for delegating to the School Board Secretary,

the Superintendent and other School Board members final authority in the

categorization of applicant community groups into the four classes, and is thus

responsible for the withholding of access on equal terms to its facilities after school

hours.

V. ALLEGATIONS OF FACT

26.On August 22, 2012, Brooke A. Morrison, the Director of Child Evangelism

Fellowship submitted to the District his application for the use of school facilities

for permission to hold after-school Good News Clubs at Foose Elementary without

paying a facilities fee. (A true and correct copy is attached hereto as Exhibit 2)

27.This was the same procedure he had followed the five previous years,

usually without resistance, although in the 2010-2011 academic year Child

Evangelism Fellowship was denied use of the facilities altogether because of the

religious nature of the group.

28.The Districts waiver of the facilities fee is a commonly sought and often

granted benefit among other community non-profit organizations within the

District.

29.In the beginning of September 2012, however, School Board Secretary



7/27

7

Roxanne Bowman called Mr. Morrison to inform him that although Child

Evangelism Fellowship would be granted permission to use school facilities, under

the Districts revised Policy Plaintiff would now have to pay a facilities fee,

amounting to approximately $1,200 per school, per academic year.

30.This is a prohibitively high sum of money for this non-profit, which serves

the community free of charge, especially in light of Plaintiffs desire to offer Good

News Clubs in other schools throughout the District as it had in the past.

31.The advent of the revised Policy does not, however, seem to have had any ill

effect on certain other community nonprofits, such as the Boys and Girls Club, the

Boy Scouts of America, Big Brothers Big Sisters, or the YMCA, as such groups

continue to be exempt from the facilities fee under the new Policy. There is no

relevant distinction between Child Evangelism Fellowship and these other groups,

for purposes of the fee exemption, except that Plaintiff is perceived by the District

primarily to be a religious group, while the others are not.

32.In denying Child Evangelism Fellowship from Class III status, the only

explanation provided by Secretary Bowman to Mr. Morrison was that the District

does not consider Child Evangelism Fellowship to be a community service, and

only those organizations which are community services are granted a fee waiver.

33.When Mr. Morrison pointed out that Child Evangelism Fellowship serves



8/27

8

the children of the community of Harrisburg in the same ways as other groups

granted the fee waiver, she informed him that she would go directly to the

Superintendent and find out more information.

34.Despite her assurance, she never called Mr. Morrison back, nor was a

written denial ever forthcoming, nor has he ever received any further explanation

whatsoever.

35.On October 17, 2012, an attorney for Child Evangelism Fellowship sent an

inquiry via email to the Harrisburg School District Solicitor, Attorney Samuel T.

Cooper III, of DILWORTH PAXSON, LLP. (A true and correct copy is attached

hereto as Exhibit 3.)

36.When no response was received, the undersigned counsel followed up said

email with a written letter on November 7, 2012. (A true and correct copy is

attached hereto as Exhibit 4.)

37.While Attorney Cooper did finally call the undersigned in response to said

letter, no information was conveyed other than to say that he was unsure about the

reason for the denial, that it could have been due to the recent change in policy,

and that he would follow up on it.

38.When no follow up occurred, the undersigned sent one final letter on

November 20, 2012, to which no response has been received. (A true and correct

copy is attached hereto as Exhibit 5.)



9/27

9

39.With no option remaining, and having already been effectively shut out of

Foose Elementary for the entire Fall semester, Plaintiff filed this Complaint.

40.Under the Policy, which was revised on November 16, 2011, groups seeking

to use school facilities are categorized into four classes.

41.Class I groups are those which are directly sponsored by the District, such as

science fairs and athletic events. Such groups are completely exempted from any

and all fees, and are covered by the Districts property and liability insurance

policy. The Harrisburg Police Athletic League (PAL), for example, was

designated by the District under the Policy as a Class I group.

42.Class II groups are those groups that directly supportdistrict activities

and include alumni organizations, PTAs, and formally recognized booster groups.

Policy. These groups are exempt from facilities fees, but are subject to custodial,

security and site manager fees in certain circumstances. Class II groups also enjoy

coverage under the Districts property and liability insurance policy.

43.As mentioned hereinabove, Class III refers to Community Service Groups.

Class III represents non-profit organizations that provide services to the

communities within the Harrisburg School District and include the Boys and Girls

Club of Harrisburg, community recreation organizations, and other non-profit

community service groups. Policy. Class III groups, like those in Class II, are

exempt from facilities fees, but are subject to custodial, security and site manager



10/27

10

fees in certain circumstances. However, Class III groups, as distinct from those in

Class II, are not covered by the Districts property and liability insurance, but are

instead required to provide an insurance certificate naming the District as

additional insured.

44.Class IV is reserved for all other organizations and individuals requesting

use of district facilities for purely private purposes. Policy. These organizations

and individuals are required to pay all fees, including facilities fees, and to provide

an insurance certificate naming the District as additional insured.

45.The Policy, both on its face and as applied, grants the District tremendous

and unbridled discretion. The Policy states that the use of any and all facilities

shall be at the exclusive discretion of the Harrisburg School Board. The

Harrisburg School Board expressly reserves the right to refuse to rent its facilities

for any purpose whatsoever and to reject or cancel any application. Policy.

46.Both pursuant to the written Policy and the application of the Policy to

various groups, many groups are granted Class III status and exempt from paying

facilities fees.

47.The District first applied its revised Policy to new facilities use applications

at its February 2, 2012 Board of School Directors Regular Meeting. Since that

date, up to and including the January 28, 2013 Regular Meeting, the District has

granted Class III status to 14 different community groups, some of which were



11/27

11

granted this status on multiple occasions for separate events. Many other groups

during this timeframe have been granted Class I or Class II status.

48.By way of example, During its November 19, 2012 Regular Meeting, the

Board of School Directors designated American Legion Post 733 and the United

States Marine Corps, among others, as Class III community groups.

49.Neither organization was therefore charged a facilities fee.

50.Some of the groups granted Class III status are not religious, while others,

such as the American Legion and Boy Scouts, have religious tenets, but are not

perceived as primarily religious by the District. For instance, the Preamble to the

American Legions Constitution states, For God and Country we associate

ourselves together for the following purposes while the Preambles

interpretation speaks of God-given rights, defines Americanism as being the

creed that has blazed the world-wide trail for belief in God and notes that the

American Legion recognizes the influence of Almighty God in all worthwhile

endeavors and declares the allegiance of Legionnaires to both God and Nation.

(See Exhibit 6, which is a true and correct copy of the Preamble to the American

Legions Constitution and the Preambles interpretation, obtained from the

American Legions website on January 31, 2013).

51.Similarly, the Boy Scouts well-known oath begins with the words On my



12/27

12

honor I will do my best / To do my duty to God and my country See Exhibit 7,

which is a true and correct copy of the Boy Scout Oath, obtained from the Boy

Scouts Website on January 31, 2013.

52.From the date the revised Policy was first applied, at least one other group

which could be perceived as primarily religious has been granted Class III status

Redeeming Grace Church for its Backyard Bible Club and Family Night for

Camp Curtin Students. However, the District persists in denying this status to

Child Evangelism Fellowship.53.By way of example, pursuant to this former Policy, during its October 17,

2011 Regular Meeting, the Board of School Directors granted fee waivers to the

Boys and Girls Club of Central PA as well as the New Birth of Freedom Council

Boy Scouts of America.

54.Big Brothers Big Sisters has not reapplied for the use of school facilities

under the revised Policy, as it enjoys the singular honor of being specifically

mentioned therein as a Class III group. The New Birth of Freedom Council Boy

Scouts of America was granted a fee waiver under the former Policy and has

likewise never reapplied under the revised Policy, though Plaintiff believes and

therefore avers that the District has nonetheless permitted it to continue meeting in

the schools without paying a facilities fee. Plaintiff believes the same is true about

the YMCA.

55.Plaintiffs Good News Clubs have always consisted entirely of Harrisburg



13/27

13

School District Students.

56.Nonetheless, even under the former Policy the District showed hostility to

Plaintiff by outright denying access to school facilities to Plaintiff during the 2010-

2011 academic year, explaining that they were prohibited from using the facilities

because they are religious.

57.Plaintiff was forced to enlist the assistance of an attorney to address the

religious discrimination by the District, and it was not until the Spring of 2011 that

the District finally agreed that Plaintiff was in fact entitled to use the facilities.

58.As aforementioned, shortly thereafter on November 16, 2011, the District

revised the Policy to its current form.

59.Regardless of which Policy has been in place with the District, Child

Evangelism Fellowship has always offered, and continues to offer the children of

the Harrisburg School District services with elements similar to those offered by

other community groups which now enjoy Class III status. Child Evangelism

Fellowship does so pursuant to its sincerely held religious beliefs, which arise out

of its love for the children and desire to share the gospel.

60.Specifically, both Child Evangelism Fellowship and Big Brothers Big

Sisters, which is allowed to use facilities free of charge, offer positive role

modeling that results in greater educational success and the avoidance of risky



14/27

14

behaviors. However, Child Evangelism Fellowship does so based upon a

Christian, religious viewpoint.

61.Child Evangelism Fellowship, like the Boy Scouts of America, which is

allowed to use facilities free of charge, teaches children values and responsibility

as well as the difference between right and wrong. While the Boy Scouts of

America teaches these values from a nondenominational viewpoint, Child

Evangelism Fellowship does so from a specifically Christian viewpoint. For

example, during their meetings the Boy Scouts may play games, welcome guest

speakers and go on field trips to teach a nonsectarian doctrine such as the fifth of

Cub Scoutings 12 Core Values: Having inner strength and confidence based on

our trust in God. (See Exhibit 8, which is a true and correct copy of Cub

Scoutings 12 Core Values, obtained from the Boy Scouts of America website on

February 2, 2013).

62.During Good News Clubs, on the other hand, instructors and children may

play games, go on field trips and welcome guest speakers in furtherance of the

specifically Christian doctrine that salvation from sins is found in a belief in Jesus

Christ alone.

63.While the YMCA was founded in 1844 as the Young Mens Christian

Association, a refuge of Bible study and prayer for young men seeking escape

from the hazards of life on the streets, it is no longer a primarily religious



15/27

15

organization, but rather a nonprofit organization for youth development, healthy

living and social responsibility[and] is guided by four core values: caring,

honesty, respect, responsibility. (See Exhibits 9 and 10, which are true and

correct copies of The story of our founding and Facts & Figures, respectively,

obtained from the YMCAs website on February 2, 2013).

64.Child Evangelism Fellowship is a non-profit organization devoted to

building strong character in youth and to mentoring them with positive, caring

relationships. It teaches students about values such as caring, honesty, respect, and

responsibility. Child Evangelism Fellowship meets these needs among the youth

of the Harrisburg School District based upon its primarily religious viewpoint,

while the YMCA does so as an expression of its primarily secular worldviews.

65.To characterize Child Evangelism Fellowships service to the community

arising out of religious beliefs and viewpoints differently than the other groups

service to the community constitutes viewpoint discrimination.

66.As a further example of the Districts inconsistent application of its own

Policy, during its December 17, 2012 Regular Meeting, the School Board approved

the Three Star Foundation as a Class III fee-exempt community group based on its

501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Despite the fact that Child Evangelism Fellowship is

also a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization, it has been denied the same treatment.



16/27

16

(A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs tax exempt letter is attached hereto as

Exhibit 11.)

67.It is established therefore that the District has engaged in discrimination in

denying Child Evangelism Fellowship access on equal terms to its facilities, and

will no doubt continue to do so without Court intervention.

68.Plaintiff has not been able to hold Good News Clubs in the District since the

2011-2012 academic year due to the cost of the facilities fee.

69.Plaintiff desires to begin immediately meeting at Foose Elementary School

and at other schools in the Harrisburg School District as soon as it is able to do so

without cost as other similar groups which provide community services to students

are able to do so.

70.Plaintiff has suffered, and is continuing to suffer, irreparable harm as a result

of the Districts conduct.

71.Plaintiff has no other adequate or speedy remedy at law to correct or redress

the deprivation of its rights by the District.

72.Unless the Districts policy and practices are enjoined, Plaintiff will continue

to suffer irreparable injury.



17/27

17

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF THE FREE SPEECH

CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION

73.Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein, as though fully set forth, the

preceding paragraphs.

74.The First Amendments Freedom of Speech Clause, incorporated and made

applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States

Constitution, prohibits discrimination based upon the content and viewpoint

of that speech.

75.The Districts Policy and practices allow community groups access to school

facilities after school, without payment of a facilities fee, where those groups are

non-profit organizations that provide services to the communities within the

Harrisburg School District. Policy.

76.Many secular and non-evangelical religious community non-profits receive

this treatment.

77.However, the District has required Child Evangelism Fellowship to pay for

the use of facilities after school.

78.Many of the community groups permitted access by the District without the

payment of the fee share the common goal of inculcating values and developing

character in the students whom they serve and accomplish this goal through

teaching students about character, morality, and positive behavior.



18/27

18

79.Child Evangelism Fellowship shares this goal and likewise teaches students

about character, morality and positive behavior, though its motivation to do so

stems from religious beliefs. Therefore, it inculcates values and seeks to develop

character from a Christian viewpoint.

80.The imposition of a facilities fee upon Child Evangelism Fellowship

effectively bars Plaintiff from school facilities, as the fee is prohibitively high for

this group.

81.The unequal treatment of Child Evangelism Fellowships religious

expression is a content based restriction in an otherwise open forum thus subject

to strict scrutiny.

82.The unequal treatment of Child Evangelism Fellowships religious

expression is also a viewpoint based restriction unconstitutional in any forum.

83.The discretion afforded to the District by the Policy would allow the District

to make viewpoint based decisions. Therefore, the policy is unconstitutional on its

face.

84.The Policy, both on its face and as applied by the District to Child

Evangelism Fellowship, is not the least restrictive means required to serve any

compelling interest the District seeks to promote.

85.There can be no compelling interest when the District previously did not

charge Child Evangelism Fellowship to use the facilities.



19/27

19

86.Nor is there a compelling interest in giving Child Evangelism Fellowship

disfavorable treatment as compared to other community groups that provide

services to children.

87.The Policy, both on its face and as applied by the District to Child

Evangelism Fellowship, burdens more of Plaintiffs speech than is necessary

because it entirely forecloses Child Evangelism Fellowship from using the facility

on account of the cost.

88.Even if, for the sake of argument, there were a compelling interest, the

manner in which the District has gone about furthering its interest in this matter

cannot possibly be considered narrowly tailored to that interest, in light of the

fact that Child Evangelism Fellowship was denied a fee exemption due to the

Districts broad discretion under the policy, despite squarely meeting all of the

elements of the fee exemption under the written Policy itself.

89.Therefore the Policy, both on its face and as applied by the District to Child

Evangelism Fellowship, violates Plaintiffs right to Free Speech as guaranteed by

the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays the Court grant the declaratory

and injunctive relief set forth hereinafter in the Prayer for Relief.



20/27

20

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF THE FREE SPEECH

CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND OF THE DUE PROCESS

CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED

STATES CONSTITUTION

90.Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein, as though fully set forth, the

preceding paragraphs.

91.The speech protections of the First and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the

government from censoring speech pursuant to prior restraints that permit it

unbridled discretion.

92.The Districts implementation of a fee for the after-school use of District

facilities by community groups constitutes a prior restraint.

93.Prior restraints can be constitutional provided they do not permit

government decision-makers unbridled discretion.

94.However, this fee system, both on its face and as applied, relies entirely

upon the Districts unbridled discretion to determine without any oversight or

appeal process which non-profit community groups qualify as Class III

Community Service Groups, and which do not.

95.The unfettered nature of this discretion is evident in the Districts decision

not to grant Class III status to Child Evangelism Fellowship, despite the fact that

Plaintiff fully qualifies for Class III status according to the requirements of the

Policy, in fact had qualified under the former policy, and other groups which

qualified previously continue to do so under the revised Policy.



21/27

21

96.The Districts Policy, both on its face and as applied to Child Evangelism

Fellowship, accordingly violates Plaintiffs right to Free Speech as guaranteed by

the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.



THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF THE FREE EXERCISE

CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION

97.Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein, as though fully set forth,

the preceding paragraphs.

98.Burdens on the free exercise of religion have historically invoked

strict scrutiny.

99.Specifically, the government may not burden conduct motivated by a

sincerely held religious belief unless the government acts by the least restrictive

means to further a compelling interest.

100. Only paramount governmental interests suffice to justify a limitation

of free exercise rights.

101. Additionally, the protections of the Free Exercise Clause pertain if the

law at issue discriminates against some or all religious beliefs or regulates or

prohibits conduct because it is undertaken for religious reasons.

102. However, a law that is neutral and of general applicability need not be



22/27

22

justified by a compelling government interest even if the law has the incidental

effect of burdening a particular religious practice.

103. Said differently, when a policy is not generally applicable because it

contains both categorical and discretionary exemptions, and a religious exemption

is denied, then strict scrutiny applies in reviewing the constitutionality of the

policy.

104. The Policy at issue in the present case is neither neutral nor generally

applicable, and therefore it should be subjected to strict scrutiny.

105. Here, the written policy allows all non-profit community groups an

exemption from facilities fees. In practice, the District is using its discretion to

grant fee exemptions only to those groups it perceives as not having a primarily

religious purpose.

106. The Policy cannot survive strict scrutiny, as it is not justified by a

compelling interest, nor is it narrowly tailored to advance that interest.

107. The District has no compelling interest in charging Child Evangelism

Fellowship a facilities fee while currently exempting other community groups, and

in prior years exempting these same other groups as well as Child Evangelism

Fellowship.

108. There is no narrow tailoring to any interest in that other similarly

situated groups are exempt.



23/27

23

109. Therefore, application of this discretionary policy to Child

Evangelism Fellowship fails strict scrutiny.



FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL

PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

110. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein, as though fully set forth,

the preceding paragraphs.

111. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires

the government to treat similarly situated groups equally.

112. Pursuant to its Policy and practice, the District allows other similarly

situated community groups whose purpose is not primarily religious to utilize the

Schools facilities after hours for after-school programs.

113. The District has treated Plaintiff disparately by charging Plaintiff a

facilities fee while waiving it for these other similarly situated groups.

114. By discriminating against the content and viewpoint of Plaintiffs

religious speech, the District is treating Plaintiff differently than other similarly

situated community groups.

115. The Districts Policy and practice violates Plaintiffs fundamental

rights, including the rights of free speech and free exercise of religion.



24/27

24

116. When government regulations, like the Districts Policy and practice

challenged herein, infringe on fundamental rights, discriminatory intent is

presumed.

117. The District lacks a rational or compelling state interest for treating

Plaintiff in such a disparate manner.

118. The Districts denial to Plaintiff of access on equal terms is not

narrowly tailored in that the Districts restriction of Plaintiffs speech and free

exercise of religion is unrelated to any legitimate government interest.

119. The Policy, both on its face and as applied to Child Evangelism

Fellowship, violates Plaintiffs right to equal protection of the laws as guaranteed

by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.



PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment as follows:

a. That this Honorable Court issue a Preliminary and Permanent

Injunction compelling the District, its officers, agents, employees, and all other

persons acting in active concert with it, to immediately categorize Child

Evangelism Fellowship as a Class III Community Service Group, thereby



25/27

25

permitting Plaintiff to resume meeting in school facilities after school without

paying a facilities fee;

b. That this Honorable Court render a Declaratory Judgment declaring

unconstitutional the Districts Policy, both on its face and as applied to Child

Evangelism Fellowship, of banning from Class III Community Service Group

status those organizations it perceives as primarily religious, in violation of the

First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution;

c. That this Honorable Court render a Declaratory Judgment declaring

the Policy regarding Class III Community Service Groups, both on its face and as

applied to Child Evangelism Fellowship, unconstitutionally vague, without

determinate standards, and permissive of administrative discretion that exceeds the

bounds permitted by the First Amendment;

d. That this Honorable Court adjudge, decree, and declare the rights and

other legal relations of the parties to the subject matter here in controversy, in order

that such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment;

e. That this Honorable Court retain jurisdiction of this matter for the

purpose of enforcing any Orders;

f. That this Honorable Court award Plaintiffs costs and expenses,

including a reasonable award of attorneys fees, in accordance with 42 U.S.C.

1988;



26/27



27/27


child evan fell commplaint

Documents