November 10, 2003

(Tucson, AZ) - The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, announced today that a federal district court in Arizona has declared that the City of Tucson discriminated against a couple, Patricia and Robert Gentala, who organized a public event celebrating the National Day of Prayer in 1997. The decision comes two years after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a lower court ruling upholding the actions of the city. The high court sent the case back down to the lower courts for reconsideration after it ruled that speakers with a religious message must receive equal treatment.

"It has taken more than six years and a trip to the Supreme Court to determine that the actions of the City of Tucson were not only discriminatory but unconstitutional as well," said Walter Weber, Senior Litigation Counsel of the ACLJ, which represents the Gentalas in the case. "Two years ago, the Supreme Court ordered the case to be reconsidered in light of an important decision that determined speakers with a religious message must be given equal access. Now, the federal district court - after taking another look at the case - has ruled that the city's actions were unconstitutional. The lesson is clear: speakers with a religious message must receive equal treatment - even when funding questions are involved."

In a 22-page decision issued today by U.S. District Court Judge Frank R. Zapata, the court concluded that "the City of Tucson's policy of precluding events 'held in direct support of religious organizations' from receiving Civic Events Funds support is declared invalid and unconstitutional because it violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is not justified by First Amendment Establishment Clause considerations."

The case began in 1997 when the ACLJ filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Gentalas claiming the couple faced unconstitutional discrimination against religious speech regarding a National Day of Prayer event in 1997 in Tucson, Arizona. Under the city's Civic Event Policy, nonprofit groups are eligible for a waiver of charges for various services - such as lighting and trash collection - in connection with events held in city parks. Pursuant to the policy, Tucson has provided free city services for such events as an Earthday Festival, a Hispanic Cultural Arts Event, and a Gay Pride Picnic. However, the city refused to provide free services for the Gentalas and their National Day of Prayer event, citing "separation of church and state."

A federal district court rejected the Gentalas' claims. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed that ruling in April 2000. Then, an eleven-judge panel of the appeals court overturned the decision of the three-judge panel and ruled against the Gentalas in March 2001. In October 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the appeals court ruling, sent the case back down and directed the lower courts to reconsider the case in light of the June 2001 decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Good News Club v. Milford Central School. In that case, the high court ruled that denying a group equal access to government facilities just because the group planned to communicate a religious message violated the federal constitutional right to free speech.

In February 2002, the federal appeals court sent the Gentala case back to U.S. District Court in Arizona where additional arguments were held in March 2003.

Weber said the decision today by the federal district court represents an important victory for the First Amendment.

"This decision is important for several reasons," said Weber. "It reaffirms the fact that religious speakers cannot be discriminated against - even when funding is arguably at issue. And, the decision complies with Supreme Court precedents in a critically important area of First Amendment law. We are hopeful the city will end the case now and realize that after six years of litigation, their actions were not only wrong but unconstitutional."

Today's decision comes just three weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court will consider another major First Amendment case that focuses on the discriminatory behavior of a state in refusing to provide scholarship money to an otherwise eligible student who wanted to major in Pastoral Ministries from a religious perspective.

On December 2nd, ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow will present oral arguments in the case of Locke v. Davey - where the ACLJ is asking the Supreme Court to uphold the findings of an appeals court that declared the scholarship funding policy of Washington State discriminatory and unconstitutional. By the state's refusal to fund the student's scholarship simply because he decided to major in religious studies from a religious perspective, the ACLJ will argue that the actions of the state violated the Free Exercise, Free Speech, and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment.

In the Gentala case, there is no word yet on whether the City of Tucson will appeal the latest decision.

The American Center for Law and Justice is an international public interest law firm focusing on constitutional law. The ACLJ is based in Washington, D.C. and its website address is www.aclj.org.