Pop culture obsessives writing for the pop culture obsessed. See 202 F.3d, at 510 (the Club “is doing something other than simply teaching moral values”). 2d 147, 150, n. 4 (NDNY 1998). Because the children cannot attend without their parents’ permission, they cannot be coerced into engaging in the Good News Club’s religious activities.

But we did not discuss this concern in our application of the law to the facts.

There is no evidence that young children are permitted to loiter outside classrooms after the schoolday has ended. Bowers claims he could lose his gun rights if the NRA is dissolved because the organization wouldn’t exist to defend those rights.

Rosenberger, supra, at 835 (“Vital First Amendment speech principles are at stake here”). Assn. In Lamb’s Chapel, we held that a school district violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment when it excluded a private group from presenting films at the school based solely on the films’ discussions of family values from a religious perspective. According to the Court of Appeals, reliance on Christian principles taints moral and character instruction in a way that other foundations for thought or viewpoints do not. The brothers countersued Lizzo, claiming that the success of her song—and essentially her entire career, then—would not have been possible without the work they did on “Healthy.”.

v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 779—780 (1995) (O’Connor, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment) (“[B]ecause our concern is with the political community writ large, the endorsement inquiry is not about the perceptions of particular individuals or saving isolated nonadherents from … discomfort … . 98—9494 (CA2), at 9.

We conclude that Milford’s restriction violates the Club’s free speech rights and that no Establishment Clause concern justifies that violation. If the NRA is dissolved, Bowers says local high school trap shooting teams would potentially no longer have funding because these teams receive grant money from the gun rights advocacy group. Finally, even if we were to inquire into the minds of schoolchildren in this case, we cannot say the danger that children would misperceive the endorsement of religion is any greater than the danger that they would perceive a hostility toward the religious viewpoint if the Club were excluded from the public forum. 120 GOOD NEWS CLUB v. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL. See 202 F.3d, at 512 (Jacobs, J., dissenting) (“[W]hen the subject matter is morals and character, it is quixotic to attempt a distinction between religious viewpoints and religious subject matters”).

Cf. We rejected Establishment Clause defenses similar to Milford’s in two previous free speech cases, Lamb’s Chapel and Widmar. Equally unsupportive is Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), in which we held that a Louisiana law that proscribed the teaching of evolution as part of the public school curriculum, unless accompanied by a lesson on creationism, violated the Establishment Clause. In Rosenberger, a student organization at the University of Virginia was denied funding for printing expenses because its publication, Wide Awake, offered a Christian viewpoint.

Although Justice Souter would prefer that a record be developed on several facts, see post, at 7, and Justice Breyer believes that development of those facts could yet be dispositive in this case, see post, at 2, none of these facts is relevant to the Establishment Clause inquiry. 7. Although the court conceded that the Bible clubs might provide incidental secular benefits, it nonetheless concluded that the school would have violated the Establishment Clause had it permitted the club’s activities on campus.

Thus, the exclusion of the Good News Club’s activities, like the exclusion of Lamb’s Chapel’s films, constitutes unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. §4071(a).

App.

Ms. Fournier then relates a Bible story and explains how it applies to Club members’ lives.

Lizzo confirmed that the two of them were present during the creation of “Healthy,” but she also noted that the only connective tissue between that song and “Truth Hurts” was the aforementioned DNA test line, which, again, was written by someone on Twitter who did later get credit.

The meetings were held in a combined high school resource room and middle school special education room, not in an elementary school classroom. Because the parties have agreed that Milford created a limited public forum when it opened its facilities in 1992, see Brief for Petitioners 15—17; Brief for Respondent 26, we need not resolve the issue here.
of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 829 (1995); see also Lamb’s Chapel, supra, at 392—393. of Buffalo, 65 App.

Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263, 271 (1981). According to McGruder, the community use policy, which prohibits use “by any individual or organization for religious purposes,” foreclosed the Club’s activities.

The Club appealed, and a divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. With these observations, the court concluded that, because the Club’s activities “fall outside the bounds of pure ‘moral and character development,’ ” the exclusion did not constitute viewpoint discrimination. No. See 496 U.S., at 250—251 (opinion of O’Connor, J.). 9.

Our opinion in Rosenberger also is dispositive. There may be as many, if not more, upperclassmen than elementary school children who occupy the school after hours. Obviously, when individuals who are not schoolteachers are giving lessons after school to children permitted to attend only with parental consent, the concerns expressed in Edwards are notpresent.7.

This case presents two questions. 10, 127 F.3d 207 (CA2 1997) (concluding that a ban on religious services and instruction in the limited public forum was constitutional), with Church on the Rock v. Albuquerque, 84 F.3d 1273 (CA10 1996) (holding that a city’s denial of permission to show the film Jesus in a senior center was unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination); and Good News/Good Sports Club v. School Dist.

Milford also relies on the Equal Access Act, 98 Stat.
71, Champaign Cty., 333 U.S. 203 (1948), for its position that the Club’s religious element would be advanced by the State through compulsory attendance laws. 1488, 42 U.S.C.

Both modes of speech use a religious viewpoint. And one easily could conclude that the films’ purpose to instruct that “ ‘society’s slide toward humanism … can only be counterbalanced by a loving home where Christian values are instilled from an early age,’ ” id., at 384, was “quintessentially religious,” 202 F.3d, at 510.

The court also rejected the Club’s equal protection claim. We did not find the Rosenberger students’ attempt to cultivate a personal relationship with Christ to bar their claim that religion was a viewpoint.

In this case, those countervailing concerns are the free speech rights of the Club and its members.

2d, at 150; App. D2. No.

Additionally, a group could sponsor a debate on whether there should be a constitutional amendment to permit prayer in public schools, id., at N6, and the Boy Scouts could meet “to influence a boy’s character, development and spiritual growth,” id., at N10—N11. Id., at 586.

§ 4071—4074, as evidence that Congress has recognized the vulnerability of elementary school children to misperceiving endorsement of religion. [Read more: Back-to-back suits seek to dissolve NRA, its charitable arm], “Well look around - all this facility would be gone, probably,” Harold Bowers, NRA member and club manager of the Evansville Gun Club said. to Pet.

It is worth noting that, although Milford repeatedly has argued that the Club’s meeting time directly after the schoolday is relevant to its Establishment Clause concerns, the record does not reflect any offer by the school district to permit the Club to use the facilities at a different time of day. One of the four individuals named in the lawsuit is longtime NRA leader Wayne LaPierre. For example, Justice Souter suggests that we cannot determine whether there would be an Establishment Clause violation unless we know when, and to what extent, other groups use the facilities.

Lizzo made her move because a pair of brothers named Justin and Jeremiah Raisen claimed that they were owed songwriting credits on “Truth Hurts” because the song was supposedly a derivative work based on a track called “Healthy” that they had previously worked on with Lizzo.

The instructors are not schoolteachers.

Second, the school is available for “social, civic and recreational meetings and entertainment events, and other uses pertaining to the welfare of the community, provided that such uses shall be nonexclusive and shall be opened to the general public.” Ibid. The State of New York authorizes local school boards to adopt regulations governing the use of their school facilities. And, we have already found that those rights have been violated, not merely perceived to have been violated, by the school’s actions toward the Club.

Milford interprets its policy to permit discussions of subjects such as child rearing, and of “the development of character and morals from a religious perspective.” Brief for Appellee in No. After all, a lawyer will just have to point out that their argument has been inconsistent and it will “undermine [their] credibility.” So this is basically all good news for Lizzo.