Facts
- A student organization, Gay Lib, sought official recognition at the University of Missouri, which would confer access to campus facilities and other benefits available to recognized groups.
- University officials denied recognition after an internal process that included a hearing officer’s finding that recognition would “tend to expand homosexual behavior” and lead to increased violations of Missouri’s sodomy statute.
- Gay Lib asserted it sought to engage in expressive and associative activities (discussion, education, advocacy) and did not propose unlawful conduct.
- Gay Lib sued university officials in federal court, alleging the denial violated the First Amendment rights of speech and association.
- The federal district court upheld the university’s denial of recognition.
- A divided Eighth Circuit reversed, holding the denial violated the First Amendment because it rested on speculative predictions of unlawful conduct rather than evidence of actual or imminent illegality; the court ordered recognition.
- The Eighth Circuit denied rehearing en banc by an equally divided vote.
- University officials petitioned for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Issues
- Whether the Supreme Court should review a public university’s denial of official recognition to a student organization based on predictions that recognition would increase violations of a state criminal statute.
- Whether, under the First Amendment, a public university may deny recognition to a student group based on speculative forecasts of unlawful conduct rather than actual or imminent illegal activity.
Decision
- The Supreme Court denied the petition for writ of certiorari, leaving the Eighth Circuit’s judgment in effect.
- Chief Justice Burger noted he would have granted certiorari for full review.
- Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justice Blackmun, dissented from the denial, arguing the case warranted review given the asserted university authority to regulate access to campus facilities and the First Amendment limits on that authority.
- Because certiorari was denied, the Supreme Court issued no merits ruling and created no binding merits precedent.
Legal Principles
- A denial of certiorari does not decide the merits and expresses no view on the correctness of the lower-court judgment.
- As left undisturbed by the Supreme Court’s denial, the Eighth Circuit’s merits holding required that a public university not deny recognition to a student organization solely on a speculative chain of predicted future criminal violations.
- Restricting a student organization’s access to recognition-based benefits implicates First Amendment speech and association interests when the organization seeks to engage in expressive activity.
- A dissent from denial of certiorari may identify questions a Justice believes warrant review but does not alter the legal effect of the denial.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari left standing an appellate ruling requiring the University of Missouri to recognize Gay Lib, while producing no Supreme Court merits decision; separate writings reflected disagreement within the Court about whether the First Amendment question and the university’s asserted regulatory authority warranted review.