I would first like to goover the basics of the law, then explore some of the more problematic requests you might get and discuss whether they would fall under the EAA.

The Equal Access Act applies only to secondary schools that receive federal financial assistance and have a "limited open forum." A "limited open forum" means the school allows non-curriculum-related student groups to meet. Translation: If you’re a public school or a private school that receives federal funds, and if you let the cheerleaders or peer helpers or chess club meet on school grounds before or after school, it applies to you. The Act does not define"secondary school" other than by reference to state law. As near as I can tell, Iowa hasn’t chosen to define that term statewide, so it falls back on your own local designation. Are you a "k-8,/9-12" district? or a"k-5/6-12"? Or some other hybrid? How you structure your district defines your "secondary school" and thus whether the Act applies to students as young as twelve.

The essence of the Equal Access Act is that we are not to deny students the opportunity to meet at school during non-instructional time because of the subject matter of the group. In addition to before and after school, lunch would also apply if you also let other groups meet during lunch time. The Act specifically mentions "religious, political, philosophical or other content of" the group’s speech.

There are some very specific "rules" about how the law works and when it works, so listen up. Er, I mean, keep reading.  You should have a policy providing that in order to fall under the Equal Access Act:

·  the meeting must be voluntary and student-initiated;

·  there is no ‘sponsorship’ by the school, the government,or its agents or employees;

·  employees or agents of the school or government are present at religious meetings only in a non-participatory capacity;

·  the meeting does not materially and substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activities within the school;and

·  non-school persons may not direct, conduct, control, or regularly attend activities of student groups

Let’s look at some ofthose conditions for a minute. I receive a number of calls each year from principals, mostly, who have been approached by local clergy asking to start a student group. That is an immediate problem, as you can see from the first bullet above. The group is supposed to be the student’s idea. Tell the youth pastor to pull out and send back a student who is interested in starting a Bible-reading or prayer group (or whatever). While you’re at it, remind him or her of the last bullet above: that if he or she wants to come to these meetings from time to time, that’s ok, but they are not to frequent the meetings nor be in charge; the students stay in control. (By the way, I analyze differently a request from a clergy person, typically the youth pastor, to have lunch with some of his or her teen parishioners at school on a regular basis. That request falls under the "visitors" policy. Do you allow individuals who are not the child’s parent to interact with the child(ren) at school? You might consider a policy on this, as the number of these requests has increased dramatically the past two or three years.)

There has been at least one case involving a student group meeting under the Equal Access Act that hadimposed a sub-condition on student membership in the group. A "Youth forChrist" group determined that membership in their after-school club wasonly open to students who had been born again or had accepted Jesus Christ astheir personal savior. The school got very concerned that this limitation wouldbe unfair to some Christian students who would be excluded. As the schooldistrict had an anti-discrimination policy they feared might be violated bythis group’s limitation, they denied the students the "born-again"criterion. The kids sued. And won. This is not a school-sponsored group (seesecond bullet, above), so the school has no right to impose its views on thestudents. In fact, where religion is concerned, it’s really hands-off. Unless,of course, the presence of the group or its activities cause a "material and substantial disruption," as in bullet four. That was put in, no doubt,to allow you to squelch or deny an opportunity for the Young Satanists to meet.(Everyone was all worried about those groups getting ‘equal access,’ but to date I have not heard of one such request that wasn’t a hoax.)

The term "sponsorship" (as used in the second bullet) means "the act of promoting, leading, or participating in a meeting." However, "the assignment of a teacher, administrator, or other school employee to a meeting for custodial purposes does not constitute sponsorship of the meeting."Translation: If the school routinely requires supervision of all student groups,it can assign a school employee to supervise this group. That person may not participate, lead, etcetera. But another portion of the Act makes it clear that we cannot assign an employee to attend a religious meeting –- even just tosupervise -– if the content of the speech of the student group is contrary tothe beliefs of the employee. Frankly, when it comes to religious groups, if anemployee volunteers to supervise a particular organization, he or she might bethe person you not consider. 

The Equal Access Actcould result in a rebirth of some of those defunct political student groups we had in the ‘60s and early ‘70s: the Young Democrats or Young Republicans (although, as George Carlin supposedly said, Can there ever be such a thing as a "young Republican"? Oh, lighten up, you Rs!). It is also available for philosophical groups, so the Nouveau Rousseaus or Daily Descartes and the Loose Lockes can sign up and meet in room 101 before or after school as well.

One of the difficult situations, frankly, is where a district is trying to transition from an older–- perhaps even unconstitutional -- model of club to an Equal Access model.Case in point: Fellowship of Christian Athletes ("FCA"). This is a well-respected national organization that has many chapters in Iowa. Traditionally, one or more coaches sponsored the chapter. Of course, student membership was voluntary. But the adult school employees were always involved and participating. Very likely, that was a First Amendment (church-state) violation, but old habits die hard you know.

The EAA gave students away to continue to have an FCA chapter, but the role of the coach had to change (see third bullet above). No longer can the coach lead or even participate (pray, preach, or proselytize) without violating the Act (and the Constitution). This doesn’t sit well with many coaches or other school employees who were used to playing and praying along, you might say. If the coach wants that badly to participate, I would definitely not appoint him supervisor. If he feels the need to be involved and active, then I suggest this club not seek to meet at school and instead meet in the evening or on weekends and move to somebody’s house or the Pizza Hut uptown.

Another controversial organization with national respect and the potential to be a public relations or political issue is the Gay/Straight Alliance. This is an organization madeup of gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender students (“GLBT”) and heterosexual students. The idea is to present a united front, celebrate this aspect of diversity, and provide support to GLBT students who may have reason to fear negative consequences if their sexual orientation becomes known in school. As you know, homosexuality as an issue in schools is rarely a ho-humtopic, so your board meetings may become packed as a result of"recognizing" the students who wish to have a GSA and meet at school. The Salt Lake City school district tried to say no a few years ago, going so far as to "close" its forum by doing away with all non-curriculum related student groups (like cheerleaders). They lost a challenge in court and eventually let the student group meet. Recently, in Louisville, a similar controversy arose, although it was after the school approved a GSA under theEqual Access Act. I would guess a lot depends on your community and its culture. In some places it’s hard for the public to accept our reasoning that "It’s the right thing to do." Sometimes folks even have trouble with a "We have to or we’ll violate the law" rationale for our decisions.  About all you can do is ride out the storm in those cases. Even in Louisville the students noticed that the majority of protestors weren’t students or even the parents of students, and that once they left town, the hubbub died down.

One final heads-up:Congress again got into the Act (pun intended) by including a related provisionin No Child Left Behind: "The Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act." This Act applies to both elementary and secondary, but apparently only to public schools. It has many of the same premises of the original EAA:Under this law, "no covered elementary or secondary school that provides an opportunity for one or more outside youth or community groups to meet on school premises or in school facilities before or after school hours shall deny equal access or a fair opportunity to meet to, or discriminate against, any group officially affiliated with Boy Scouts of America or any other youth group listed in Title 36 of the United States Code as a patriotic society." Apparently as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2000 decision (Boy Scouts of America v. Dale), some schools with anti-discrimination policies took the position that they wouldn’t allow the Boy Scouts to use school facilities because of theScouts’ policy of refusing to allow homosexual individuals to be scout leaders or assistants. This new law is designed to re-open the school doors to the Boy Scouts -- if those doors are already open to other "outside youth or community groups."

My best advice: Before you react to a request from a student or youth group to meet at school, review the law and, of course, CYA: Consult Your Attorney.