The Christian Legal Society is a national membership organization of nearly 4,500 Christian attorneys, judges, law professors and law students, as well as supportive people. The Center for Law and Religious Freedom is C.L.S.= advocacy arm since 1975. Since 1975 the center has filed briefs by top church-state experts in scores of cases before the U.S. Supreme court and lower courts in support of religious liberty for all faiths as well as playing a key role in drafting and securing passage of the Equal Access Act (1984) and the Religious Freedom Act (1993) - the remedial legislation most responsible today for the protection of the religious liberties of all Americans. The Center for Law and Religious Freedom has filed briefs in virtually every church-state case before the U.S. Supreme Court since 1980.

C.L.S. member Tim Belz and Professor Esbeck handled the case of AGood News/Good Sports Club V. School District of the city of Ladue@ in cooperation with the Rutherford Institute. The Center provided extensive consultation to the students attorneys and filed >frient of the court= briefs in the federal and appellate courts. In this case the Supreme court preserved a significant victory for the right of parents to organise religious meetings on campus after school for students. The High Court closed the door on further efforts by a junior high school to prevent students from meeting on campus for parent-initiated Bible study and Christian fellowship after school. According to Steve McFarnland, director of Center for Law and Religious Freedom, Athis case extends equal access for religious speech beyond previous decisions involving public schools@. Federal law guarantees that secondaary school students can organise religious meetings, but this cas extends that right to partent organised Bible classes. The Good News/Good Sport Club used facilities at the Ladue Junior High School from 1988 to 1992 meeting immediately after school so that the participants could take the late bus home. In response to complaints about the religious content of the meetings, the school district barred the club from meeting until 6pm. although the school allowed a wide variety of other community organisations to meet directly after the school day. The district justified discrimination by arguing that the principle of church-state seperation required it. The C.L.S. Executive director Samuel Casey said as a result of this case that Athere is a need for a constitutional amendment to finally send the message that government doesn=t have to be hostile to religion.

According to C.L.S. the Supreme C ourt in its 1995-1996 term passed up several oppertunities to connect serious deprivations of religious liberty in schools and clarify the right of students. One related C.L.S. case that proves this is Settle V. Dickonson County School district in which a nine grader in Tenesse submitted an outline for a research paper on the life of Christ. Her teacher gave her a >zero= grade explaining among other reasons that religious topics have no place in schools. This blantant legal error was upheld by a federal appeals court which ruled that schools have absolute discretion over curricular assignments.

In another related C.L.S. case Joint School Disrict No.241 V. Harris, the Supreme court reased a lower court ruling that prohibited student initiated prayer at public school graduation cermonies. In examing the schools district=s request that the High Court review the case, the Justices concluded that intervening events had made the case moot, requiring the Court to vacate the lower courts restrictive opinion and dismiss the case altogher. Steve McFarnland director of C.L.S.=s Center for Law and Religious Freedom said of this decision that Aa bad gruaduation prayer

decision is now of the books@. According to McFarnland The Harris case seemed like a good candidate for restoring the continuing controversy of graduation prayer but unfortunately we will have to live with uncertainty for now.

The C.L.S. expresses strong support for a constitutional amendment ending government hostility towards religion. They believe that the constitution should be amended to stop official animosity toward religious speech and religious people. The C. L. S. believe that Athe courts interpretation of the Establishment Clause - and other components of the First Amendments Religious Clause is still in need of repair. According to Casey, director of C.L.S. >No one is persuasively arguing that we should amend the constitution to permit teacher - led classroom prayer but >an amendment should instead over rule church-state cases imposing special disabilities upon religion. Too many public officials believe and some courts have held, that the Establishment clause compels government to discriminate religious ideas and behaviour. The C.L.S. continue to discuss with the Congress and other groups the proper wording for an amendment that would ensure the broadest range of religious freedoms.