## Facts

- A public law school operated an official recognition program for student organizations; recognized groups received benefits such as access to an email list, bulletin-board postings, room reservations, storage/meeting space, faculty advising, publicity, and funding.
- The university maintained nondiscrimination and equal-opportunity policies, including equal educational opportunity regardless of sexual orientation, and required student organizations to comply with nondiscrimination law.
- A Christian student organization held open meetings but limited voting membership and leadership to students who affirmed a statement of faith and complied with conduct standards, including refraining from sexual activity outside a heterosexual marriage and requiring repentance for homosexual conduct.
- The dean concluded the organization’s membership requirements violated the school’s nondiscrimination policies because they excluded those who engaged in or affirmed homosexual conduct.
- The school revoked the organization’s recognized status, causing loss of the recognition-related benefits.
- Other student organizations, including groups organized around racial, gender, political, or ideological identities, remained recognized, and the school had not applied the same policy scrutiny to those groups.
- The organization sued, asserting violations of free speech, expressive association, free exercise, equal protection, and due process, and sought a preliminary injunction restoring recognition during litigation.

## Issues

1. Whether the organization showed a likelihood of success on First Amendment free-speech and expressive-association claims challenging revocation of recognition under the school’s nondiscrimination policies.
2. Whether irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and the public interest supported a preliminary injunction reinstating recognition pending a final decision.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit reversed the denial of a preliminary injunction.
- The court ordered issuance of a preliminary injunction restoring the organization’s recognized status while the case proceeded.
- The court found a sufficient likelihood of success on free-speech and expressive-association grounds, irreparable harm from loss of First Amendment freedoms, and that equities and the public interest favored interim relief.

## Legal Principles

- A public university’s student-organization recognition system that provides access to institutional resources can function as a limited/designated public forum; restrictions must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.
- Denying recognition or benefits because of disagreement with a group’s message constitutes impermissible viewpoint discrimination in such a forum.
- The First Amendment right of expressive association protects a group’s ability to set membership and leadership criteria that are closely tied to its message; compelled inclusion that alters or burdens the group’s expression can be unconstitutional.
- Selective or non-neutral enforcement of nondiscrimination policies against a particular viewpoint supports claims of viewpoint discrimination and strengthens constitutional objections to denial of recognition.
- For preliminary injunctive relief, likely success on the merits plus irreparable injury (including presumptive irreparable harm from even brief loss of First Amendment rights), coupled with a favorable balance of harms and public interest, can justify reinstatement of recognition pending final adjudication.

## Conclusion

The court required temporary reinstatement of the student organization’s official status because the record at the preliminary-injunction stage indicated that revoking recognition based on the group’s religiously grounded membership standards likely burdened expressive association and reflected viewpoint-based, selectively enforced application of the school’s nondiscrimination policy.


Christian Legal Soc'y v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853 (7th Cir. 2006)