Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. District of Columbia, et al.

Case Description

In 2022, after a brief pause during COVID, FCA returned to campus at Jackson-Reed High School in D.C. Two weeks later, a part-time freshman baseball coach told local FCA staff that, because of FCA’s beliefs, there was “no place for a group like FCA in a public school.” He filed a complaint with D.C. Public Schools (DCPS), claiming violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act by allowing FCA on campus.

DCPS and DCPS officials terminated the status of the FCA as a recognized student club at Jackson-Reed High School—stopping its meetings, removing it from the list of student clubs, and deleting its club website. The asserted ground for derecognizing FCA was that the group had violated DCPS’ Anti-Discrimination Policy by requiring that its student leaders adhere to standards limiting sexual conduct to marriage between a man and woman. According to DCPS, FCA thereby discriminated against gay and lesbian students.

DCPS launched a formal investigation into FCA during which FCA representatives explained that any student is welcome to participate in FCA and all FCA asks is that its student leaders—those who lead prayer, Bible study, and religious teaching—agree with its religious beliefs. The investigation resulted in DCPS kicking FCA off campus at Jackson-Reed but at the same time offering to let FCA back on campus only if it assured that anyone—regardless of . . . religious affiliation, or personal belief”—could lead FCA.

FCA appealed the decision, pointing out that DCPS violated FCA’s constitutional and statutory rights by excluding FCA from campus because FCA asks its leaders to agree with its beliefs. FCA argued that the selective targeting by DCPS of FCA over its religious leadership requirements clearly violates the law. In fact, Jackson-Reed recognizes many student groups formed around particular beliefs and characteristics—including the Asian Student Union, which is “for students of Asian heritage,” and the Wise Club, which offers a “separate space for young women,”—and DCPS itself even runs entire schools that condition admission on race and sex.

FCA filed a federal lawsuit against DCPS on May 7, 2024, pointing to Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified Sch. Dist., 46 F.4th 1075 (9th Cir. 2023), and asking the court for a preliminary injunction. Two months later, the court granted the preliminary injunction, allowing FCA to return to Jackson-Reed’s campus while asking its leaders to embrace its core religious beliefs. The court found DCPS had selectively enforced the nondiscrimination policy, derecognizing FCA while allowing other groups that “appear to limit membership on the basis of characteristics protected under the Anti-Discrimination Policy.” Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. District of Columbia, 743 F. Supp. 3d 73, 91 (D.D.C. 2024).

DCPS then amended its policy to allow student religious groups like FCA to prefer persons “of the same religion” in leadership and membership. Shortly thereafter, DCPS filed a motion to dismiss FCA’s claims for injunctive relief, claiming that the new policy mooted the case, and to dismiss the claims for damages against two individual defendants on the ground of qualified immunity, claiming its two defendant administrators were entitled to qualified immunity because, according to DCPS, it wasn’t clearly established that they couldn’t discriminate against FCA in this way.

The Center filed an amicus brief in which it argued that the grounds for dismissal asserted by DCPS are meritless. More specifically, the brief points out that the recognition of FCA as an official group and the new policy do not prevent DCPS from changing its mind down the road. A defendant’s voluntary cessation of challenged conduct does not moot a case unless the defendant clearly shows the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur. No such clear assurance exists here.