Impact of New York Anti Discrimination Law

[twin_wasp]

This is the first time I have posted a topic, so here goes.

 

The New York State Senate just passed the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA) a law forbidding discrimination in employment, housing, education and public services on the basis of sexual orientation.

 

The bill memo that accompanied the law can be found at:

 

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=1971

 

Sexual orientation is defined in the law as heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or asexuality, whether actual or perceived. However, nothing contained herein shall be construed to protect conduct otherwise proscribed by law."

 

The law leaves in place an exception for religious organizations, as follows:

 

 

"11. Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to bar any religious or denominational institution or organization, or any organization operated for charitable or educational purposes, which is operated, supervised or controlled by or in connection with a religious organization, from limiting employment or sales or rental of housing

accommodations or admission to or giving reference to persons of the same religion or denomination or from taking such action as is calculated by such organization to promote the religious principles for which it is established or maintained."

 

So my question is, does the religious exemption apply to BSA?

 

Now before folks go too far denouncing liberalism, this bill had bipartisan support, and was supported by Republican Governor Pataki and Republican Senate majority leader Bruno.

 

Twin_Wasp

 

 

 

[evmori]

Interesting! If a Troop or Pack is sponsored by a church does this law apply? Hmmmmmmmm.........

 

 

A blessed Christmas to all!

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

Actually the Scout units chartered by a church should be fine, its the ones that are chartered by VFW, American Legion Posts, Etc that I wonder about

[RobK]

twin_wasp,

 

Now before folks go too far denouncing liberalism, this bill had bipartisan support...

 

Just being Republicans doesn't make them conservatives. There are many

Republicans In Name Only (RINO), especially in the northeast. Mayor Bloomberg of New York is one glaring example.

 

-Rob

[littlebillie]

Regardless of the sponsoring organization, it is the policies of the BSA that are overriding and in force. Anything else puts Scouting into the position of giving weight to "community standards" and local groups being able to establish their own policies for membership and leadership.

 

While I think this is in fact where it belongs, Executive has declined to embrace the community standards solution, and so no matter the membership policies or requirements of the sponsoring organization itself, no unit is permitted to allow the forbidden populations into their ranks - not with a Texas blessing.

 

 

 

[NJCubScouter]

The "religious exemption" probably does not apply to the BSA, but it doesn't matter. Under the "Dale" decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, New York's new statute cannot constitutionally be applied to the BSA. New York's statute is, in meaning if not exact language, the same as the New Jersey statute involved in the "Dale" case. I read the New York statute and it does include "public accomodations" in the list of "places" where anti-gay discrimination is prohibited; it is the "public accomodation" section that the New Jersey Supreme Court said was applicable to the BSA.

 

The "Dale" case gives a state high court, facing a similar case, two choices: One, find that the BSA is not a place of public accomodation under that state's law, in which case the statute probably doesn't apply; or two, find that the BSA is a place of public accomodation, in which case applying the statute would violate the BSA's First Amendment right of "expressive association," so the statute cannot be enforced in that instance. Either way, the result is the same.

[eisely]

NJCubScouter is presumably correct as regards simple membership in BSA. As far as I know all the cases have involved non paid members of BSA. What about paid staff? Is BSA allowed under these laws to not hire an out of the closet homosexual who wants to work in the back office of a council?

[berkshirescouter]

Eisely

It is my understanding that all employees of BSA must be registered adult leaders, therefor to be hired they must meet membership criteria. This allows them to restrict employment.

[littlebillie]

Is that hiring requirement extended to file clerks and janitors at HQ? Just curious - seems like the local Scouting units there could be pretty top heavy!?

[twin_wasp]

Interesting responses.

 

I believe that the law does not apply to the membership rules of voluntary groups, thus BSA would not be required to change its membership rules. The Supreme Court Dale decision establishes the right of voluntary groups to have their own membership rules anyway.

 

The new law explicitly applies to employment, which was not really covered by the Dale decision. To be covered by the religious exemption, BSA would have to be a religion, or an institution established by one. The way I read the law, you could argue it either way. BSA sometimes claims to be a religious institution, and other times says it is non denominational.

 

Perhaps this was covered in one of the "bill memos" that circulated in the legislature. These are documents that clarify the intent of a law, and have some weight in applying the law. Is there an insider among our members who may know whether the NY state legislature intended to give an exclusion to BSA?

 

 

[littlebillie]

how about voluntary groups that have a professional, paid core group? Executive, in this case, and all paid employees in support of the org and simply the physical facilities?

[tjhammer]

Relevant case: On October 17, 2000, Leonard Lanzi, Council Scout Executive of Santa Barbara Council, stood before the County Board of Commissioners. He was called there to to defend why the BSA should continue to receive "preferential" treatment from the county, despite it's gay ban, which was contrary to the County's stated positions. Council Scout Executive Leo Lanzi stated that he deeply believed in the BSA, and would not work for them if he was "not certain that they save lives". He also added that while he was a private person, he himself was a gay man. He stated this he said "because he did not wish to lie" and because he wanted to illustrate why he still supported BSA despite this one issue which effected him personally (presumably in an attempt to convince the County to do the same).

 

Ten days later, BSA fired him, under the grounds that he could not be a member. He sued BSA, and settled with BSA in June of last year. I am not aware of the terms of the settlement. My understanding is that non Field Service staff (not district and council executives, etc) are exempt from the "gay ban" and protected by the non-discrimination employment laws. I wonder what was accomplished, if anything, by Mr. Lanzi's action.