The Supreme Court voted 5-4 on Wednesday to deny a request by Yeshiva University to block a lower court ruling requiring New York University to recognize an LGBTQ student club, the Pride Alliance.
In an unsigned order, the Supreme Court noted that the New York state courts have yet to issue a final ruling on the case and that Yeshiva could return to the Supreme Court after the New York courts have acted.
“The petition is denied because it appears that petitioners have at least two other avenues for expedited or temporary state judicial relief,” the court said.
Justice Samuel Alito, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, dissented from the court’s decision, noting that lower courts could take “months to rule.”
“I see no reason why we should not grant a stay at this time,” he said.
Noting that the school opposed recognizing a group that would have consequences inconsistent with the Torah, Alito said: “The First Amendment guarantees the right to the free exercise of religion, and if that provision means anything, it prohibits a state from imposing her own preferred interpretation of the Bible.”
“The result is that Yeshiva will almost certainly be forced for at least some time (and perhaps for a long time) to teach its students according to what it views as an incorrect interpretation of the Torah and Jewish law,” Alito continued. . .
He said a state’s imposition of “its own mandatory interpretation of scripture is a shocking development that calls for review” and added that “it is our duty to defend the Constitution even when doing so is controversial.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor – who has jurisdiction over the lower court – had temporarily blocked the order last week, a move intended to give the full court more time to act.
The court’s decision is a rare loss, for now, for religious freedom advocates on the Supreme Court.
Last term, the court’s conservative majority ruled in favor of religious conservatives in two cases. Additionally, in 2021, the court sided with a Catholic foster care agency that refused to consider same-sex couples as potential foster parents.
Alito has repeatedly called for greater protections for the free exercise of religion, including in a July speech in Rome. “Religious freedom is under attack in many places,” Alito said.
In ruling against Yeshiva, a judge focused on whether the university qualified as a religious institution within the meaning of the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), a public accommodations regulation that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. The law specifically excludes certain religious corporations, and Yeshiva argued that it falls within the exception.
The court noted, however, that under an amendment to the school’s charter passed in 1967, the university is considered an “educational corporation.”
“The Yeshiva’s organizational documents do not expressly indicate that the Yeshiva has a religious purpose,” Judge Lynn R. Kotler said in holding that the Yeshiva is not exempt from the law.
The court also rejected the school’s claims that the NYCHRL violates Yeshiva’s First Amendment Rights, holding that the Public Accommodations Act is a neutral law with general application to all parties.
“It is not aimed at religious practice, its purpose is to prevent discrimination, and it applies equally to all places of public accommodation except those expressly exempted as distinctly private or religious corporations organized under educational or religious law,” Kotler wrote. .
The judge said the challengers sought “equal access” and that the school “doesn’t need to make a statement supporting a particular view,” and also noted that some of Yeshiva’s graduate schools allow LGBTQ groups, undermining the university’s arguments.
In court papers filed with the Supreme Court, the school argued that the lower court’s opinion represented an “unprecedented intrusion into Yeshiva’s ecclesiastical autonomy” and argued that as “a deeply religious Jewish university, Yeshiva cannot comply with this order, because to do so would violate his sincere religious convictions about how to mold his undergraduates in Torah values.”
Attorneys for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents Yeshiva, said the lower court’s decision is an “unprecedented” invasion of the university’s religious beliefs and a clear violation of Yeshiva’s First Amendment rights.
“The Torah guides everything we do at Yeshiva – from how we educate students to how we operate our dining halls to how we organize our campus,” Ari Berman, president of Yeshiva University, said in a statement before the court. “We care deeply about and welcome all of our students, including our LGBTQ students, and we continue to engage in a productive dialogue with our Rabbis, faculty, and students about how we apply Torah values to create an inclusive environment in campus. We only ask the government to allow us the freedom to practice the Torah according to our values.”
A lawyer for the current and former students behind the challenge — which won in the lower court — argued it was premature for the Supreme Court to intervene now because New York’s appeals courts have yet to rule on the merits and state law issue has not been fully resolved.
“Applicants are not only bypassing the entire state appeals process, but they are also pushing the Court to address both novel and weighty First Amendment questions without the benefit of full briefing or oral argument,” attorney Katherine Rosenfeld told the justices in court. papers.
Rosenfeld said the lower court ruling “simply requires” the university to grant the Pride Alliance access to the same facilities and privileges as “87 other recognized student groups.”
“This decision does not affect the University’s established right to express to all students its sincere beliefs about Torah values and sexual orientation,” Rosenfeld said.
Jillian Weinberg, a student at Yeshiva’s Graduate School of Psychology, told CNN in an interview that Ferkauf recognizes LGBTQ groups, even if Yeshiva’s undergraduate school does not.
He said Ferkauf faculty and students are “concerned about the harm that President Ari Berman’s actions will cause to the mental health and well-being of LGBTQIA+ students and faculty.”
The New York Court of Appeals agreed to hear an appeal of the ruling this fall, but declined to put the lower court’s ruling on hold, prompting school officials to petition the high court.
This story has been updated with additional details.
