United States Ninth Circuit

In an action claiming that the Boy Scouts' lease of public lands for its headquarters, accompanied by the Boy Scouts' prohibitions on atheism and homosexuality, was unconstitutional, the Ninth Circuit certifies the following questions to the California Supreme Court: 1) Do the leases interfere with the free exercise and enjoyment of religion by granting preference for a religious organization in violation of the No Preference Clause in article I, section 4 of the California Constitution?; 2) Are the leases "aid" for purposes of the No Aid Clause of article XVI, section 5 of the California Constitution? and 3) If the leases are aid, are they benefiting a "creed" or "sectarian purpose" in violation of the No Aid Clause?

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/03/2010
• Published 06/03/2010

Judges

• Before: WILLIAM C. CANBY, JR., ANDREW J. KLEINFELD, and MARSHA S. BERZON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• John David Blair-Loy, Esquire, Legal Director, David Blair-Loy, Elvira Cacciavillani, Esquire, Aclu Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, Mark W. Danis, Esquire, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Mattheus E. Stephens, Esquire, Stock Stephens, LLP, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee., George Frederick Schaefer, Esquire, City Attorney's Office, San Diego, CA, for Defendant., Scott H. Christensen, Hughes Hubbard & Reed, LLP, Washington, DC, George A. Davidson, Esquire, Carla A. Kerr, Litigation Counsel, Hughes, Hubbard & Reed, New York, NY, Rita M. Haeusler, Esquire, Alicia Mew, Esquire, Hughes Hubbard & Reed, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.