In a constitutional challenge to defendants' prohibition against the after-hours use of school facilities for religious services, judgment of the district court enjoining prohibition is reversed because: 1) the prohibition does not exclude expressions of religious points of view or of religious devotion, but excludes for valid non-discriminatory reasons only a type of activity; and 2) defendants reasonably seek, by the prohibition, to avoid violating the Establishment Clause through permissible content-based restriction which does not violate the Free Speech Clause.