The following comes from a March 18 story in UT SanDiego.
A lawsuit filed more than a decade ago that sought to cancel leases the Boy Scouts had with the city of San Diego for using property at Balboa Park and Mission Bay is officially over.
In December, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of the Scouts and declared the leases legal, concluding they did not violate the state or federal constitution ban on giving aid or preference to religious groups. The ruling overturned a lower-court ruling that struck down the leases.
The American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties, which filed the suit in 2000 on behalf of a lesbian couple and an agnostic couple in San Diego, could have appealed that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The deadline to file a request for the high court to take the case is this week. David Loy, the ACLU’s legal director in San Diego, said Monday no such appeal will be made.
“We’re not pursuing it any further,” Loy said.
His comments came after U.S. District Judge Irma Gonzalez, in a brief hearing Friday, entered a court order finding the case in favor of the Scouts, as the appeals court had directed.
That means the lawsuit, which once drew national attention, is now over….
The suit was one of several filed nationally against scouting groups in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2000, which said that the Boy Scouts were a private organization and could discriminate in its membership policies….
For decades, the Scouts have leased 16 acres in Balboa Park and a half-acre on Fiesta Island for camping and other recreational activities. The organization used to pay a nominal fee of $1 a year in rent for the Balboa Park lease, but in 2002 — after the lawsuit was filed — the city struck a new, 25-year lease with the group.
Under the new terms, the Scouts pay the same $1 in rent but also must pay an annual administration fee initially set at $2,500. The lease also requires the Scouts to maintain the property and make $1.7 million in improvements.
The lawsuit alleged because of the Scouts’ discriminatory policies the two families felt unwelcome in the organization, and the leases effectively prohibited their sons from enjoying the use of public, city-owned land. It also alleged the city showed favoritism in awarding the leases.
A federal judge agreed in 2003, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in December swept aside that ruling. The appeals court noted the city has scores of leases with nonprofit groups, including those affiliated with churches and those that limit membership based on race or ethnicity.
The court said the leases are “incidental” aid to the Scouts, and the purpose of the lease was not to promote religious activities.
The city and the Scouts were named as defendants in the suit. But in 2004 the city settled with the ACLU, agreeing to terminate the leases but allowing the them to remain in effect until the case was over, including through appeals. If the Scouts won, they would get the lease for the full 25-year term.
The city also agreed to pay $950,000 to the ACLU in legal fees and costs.
The Scouts then sued the city over the settlement, but that suit was quietly dismissed by the Scouts last month, federal court records show
To read entire story, click here.
OK, in the haggling process between the gay movement and the Scouts, how is the situation going with the Scouts giving the go ahead for sodomite scout leaders? Could there be a connection between these gay law suits in the sense of extortion? For example, the gays tell the Scouts to allow sodomite leaders or else they’ll launch law suits on one or another issues against the Scouts. Still wondering why national Scout leaders have instituted an extremely high pay bureaucracy. Maybe among other things, such a thing would make for a target for people attempting to cash in on it somehow.
The BSA, and other groups espousing Tradition, must be even more vigilant and aggressive in litigation. Now that the appellate court has spoken, all steps should be taken to make this decision public knowledge, and later to remind counsel to other prospective litigants not to pursue this line of litigation. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (and like State rules) can sanction lawyers for pursuing legal actions where they know that no legal grounds exist for them. While this line of approach may be a bit early, it is not too early to be the pit bull here. Just take a look at how the homosexual sexual lobby uses each legal precedent to build their case toward achieving their goals.
OK, so 4 adults and several minors cost San Diego almost a million dollars in a frivolous lawsuit. I think they should be billed for at least part of it. . .why should the taxpayers have to pay? That money doesn’t come out of thin air.
Now someone tell me, why would you put your boys into this organization?
Mbuku,
How do you get the ^ above your name?
Of course the Anti Christ Legal Unit (ACLU) will not appeal because they know that the rats they infected the National “Leadership” with into the BSA National Committee are probably about to give them what they want anyway.
The Boy Scouts of America has probably been more responsible for saving at Risk Youth from bad influences than any other such organization including the Churches. Sadly that all may change soon.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Kenneth, when I was in the Boy Scouts, at about the same time you were, we lived by the Scout Oath and Law. We were taught to do our duty to God and Country. We were taught to be morally straight. When I went before the Board of Review for my Eagle badge I was not asked if I was gay or straight. Likely didn’t occur to them. When I received my Ad Altare Dei award, I wasn’t asked if I was gay or straight. To be truthful, I don’t think those questions would have come up in discussion. No where in the Scout Handbook, however, where it explained the meaning of each part of the Oath and Law did it mention gay or straight behavior and belief. The question was whether you believed in God or not. It could be any God. The Protestants had their God and Country award, the Jews had their award, and every other religion had their awards. The question for us today, I think, is what do we do about the new knowledge that we have that being gay is not a chosen orientation, but one with which people are born, just as the majority of people are born heterosexual. Over the years science has changed but the rules haven’t. How do we accomodate gay children today now that we know more about their situation? How do we take the hate out of our speech and actions? How do we teach the children that they are loved by God? And by us? Instead of making them think that we hate them?
Over the years science has changed but the rules haven’t. … And Truth never changes Bob One…
How do we take the hate out of our speech and actions? —As defined by whom?
How do we teach the children that they are loved by God? And by us?…Stop denying Christ and stop affirming sin
Instead of making them think that we hate them?… again as defined by whom
Why should the city have to reimburse ACLU?
More proof that the ACLU is a Left Wing Hate Group populated with anti-Christian bigots!
As Father with a son in Boy Scouts I will soon have to remove him. This May they will vote on weather to allow people who are professed homosexuals to become troop leaders and to receive the Eagle Scout award. I have taken the survey they e-mailed out and it is biased. I have listened to the homosexual agenda and there goal is to make the Church irrelavant. I heard this at my work from a homosexual person giving a talk. According to the Catachism we are supposed to treat these people with respect. How do we do that when they are destroying our Church? Jesus said it best, Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you. We need to stand up with love but never stand down on this issue. Please pray and fast that the Boy Scouts don’t change.