Voluntary associations are at the heart of American civic life. Freedom of association like freedom of speech, is protected by the 1st amendment and it is a right which lies at the foundation of a free society (Shelton v Tucker, 364 U.S. 479, 486, 1960).
Part of the freedom of association is "the freedom to identify the people who constitutes the association, and to limit the association to those people only" (Democratic Party of the USA v Wisconsin, 450, US, 107, 122, 1981). Moreover, the argument of the plaintiff on which the LAD is enforceable to us is in fact an intrusion of the state into the internal affairs of an association. The regulation aims at forcing the BSA to accept members it does not desire.
In case of BSA, the people who constitutes the association are the boys and the adults who are responsible for them who agree to live by the scout oath and the scout law. Those people must be honest and clean in their speeches and actions and faithful in their religious belief. The association is thus absolutely entitled to limit membership to those who accept its philosophy.
[...] BSA's membership is thus restricted to those willing and able to understand and live by the Scout oath and law. The Kiwani Intal. case acknowledged that Kiwanis Ridgewood was not a place of public accommodation under NJ LAD because of the selective criteria for membership in Kiwanis Ridgewood. In our case, there are also selective criteria, so the BSA is not a place of public accommodation. Thus, the LAD should/must not be applicable to the BSA. [...]
[...] The association is thus absolutely entitled to limit membership to those who accept its philosophy. Private expressive associations have as a matter of fact the (unqualified) right to choose their leaders The freedom to select leaders is essential to the freedom of association, because the personality, ideas and commitments of a leader often define the character of the group. This court has recognized the right of political organizations to select their leaders free of state intervention (Eu v San Francisco County democratic central committee US 1989). [...]
[...] As a private association, BSA has the right to choose its own members Voluntary associations are at the heart of American civic life. Freedom of association like freedom of speech, is protected by the 1st amendment and it is a right which lies at the foundation of a free society (Shelton v Tucker U.S 1960). Part of the freedom of association is "the freedom to identify the people who constitutes the association, and to limit the association to those people only" (Democratic Party of the USA v Wisconsin US 1981). [...]
[...] Because Dale's manifest views look contrary to the Boy scouting policy, BSA is entitled to decline his offer of services as a volunteer leader. So there is no matter of discrimination but only a matter of proper conduct, of criteria which have to be fulfilled and which are not. Boy scouting association claim is supported by an interpretation à contrario of the Roberts cases In these cases, the court held that the state could compel/force certain club to accept women as members (Board of directors of Rotary v Rotary Club of Duarte US 537, 1987). [...]
[...] So, you must be aware of the non logical situations which can result from a too large definition The values of the Scout oath and scout law would be undermined if the state intrudes too much in its internal affairs. We merely think that BSA is not a place of public accommodation. As a matter of fact, the Supreme court in Fraser v Robin Dee Day Camp (44 N.J 1965) stated that a place of public accommodation shall include a term of enlargement and not of limitation and BSA' s membership practices and policy do not reflect "an open and unrestricted invitation to the community as large to join the organization". [...]
Bibliographie, normes APA
Citez le doc consultéLecture en ligne
et sans publicité !Contenu vérifié
par notre comité de lecture
