ACLU Continues Attack!

[scoutldr]

This just in from our Scout Executive: SUBJECT: Governmental Sponsorship of Traditional BSA Units In 1999 the ACLU sued the federal government to compel the military to cease sponsoring traditional Scouting units. The BSA is not a party to this litigation. The Department of Justice and the Department of Defense agreed to resolve this issue in 2004 by ceasing to sponsor traditional Scouting units. All councils were advised in July 2004 to transfer sponsorship of such units to nongovernmental entities. It was emphasized that this only involved a change of the party signing the unit charter and did not affect access to facilities or other support for the BSA. These transfers are now completed. The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois has recently circulated a letter threatening to initiate new litigation unless the Boy Scouts of America terminates all charter agreements it has entered into with schools and other governmental entities. This threat is the latest round in the ACLUs unceasing campaign against the Boy Scouts of America. Since 1981, the ACLU has participated in at least 14 cases against the Boy Scouts, which if laid end to end, would amount to 89 years worth of litigation to date. There are no legal restrictions on the BSA in terms of what entities it may look to for sponsorship. Just about any group willing to accept the program could sponsor a BSA unit. The issue is whether there are legal restrictions on governmental entities that would affect their ability to sponsor traditional Scouting units. Thus, the ACLU will be suing schools and housing authorities, not the BSA, over the issue of sponsorship. The BSA has enjoyed excellent relationships with schools and governmental entities that have sponsored Scouting units, but these parties should not have to be exposed to the expense and inconvenience of litigation for their support of Scouting. Accordingly, all councils should move immediately to transfer sponsorship of all traditional Scouting units sponsored by governmental entities to nongovernmental entities. As in the case with military units, this action does not affect BSA access to governmental facilities or other traditional support.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

It's about time; they should have been dropped in 2000, after the Dale decision.

[evmori]

Misguided lot the ACLU!

[packsaddle]

I see a couple of alternatives here. BSA studied the issues carefully and with full knowledge of the legal consequences, went ahead. And now they are whining about what they knew was going to happen.

 

Another alternative is that they thoughtlessly pursued the policy with no consideration of the legal consequences.

 

Either way the consequences are there. Tough luck. I'm wondering which alternative makes BSA look good.

[johndaigler]

Nobody should be surprised - National has dragged its feet hoping that a better result would appear.

 

We can't have it both ways. If we choose to be different, we choose to be treated differently.

 

That fight's over (won or lost, depending on how you look at it) - why do we think we can keep fighting it? Why are we surprised and insulted each time we're reminded of historical truth?

 

jd

[Hunt]

I suppose it makes for good press in certain quarters for BSA to be embattled by the ACLU.