3/13/2017 BoyScoutsofAmericav.

Dale|Oyez

(/)

Boy Scouts of America v. Dale

PETITIONER RESPONDENT

Boy Scouts of America Dale

LOCATION

Boy Scouts of America

DOCKET NO. DECIDED BY

99-699 Rehnquist Court (1986-2005)

LOWER COURT

New Jersey Supreme Court

CITATION ADVOCATES

530US640(2000) George A. Davidson (advocates/george_a_davidson)

(https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/530/640) Argued the cause for the petitioners

Evan Wolfson (advocates/evan_wolfson)

ARGUED
Argued the cause for the respondent
Apr 26, 2000

DECIDED

Jun 28, 2000

Facts of the case

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/99699 1/3
3/13/2017 BoyScoutsofAmericav.Dale|Oyez
The Boy Scouts of America revoked former Eagle Scout
and assistant scoutmaster James Dale's adult
membership when the organization discovered that Dale
was a homosexual and a gay rights activist. In 1992, Dale
led suit against the Boy Scouts, alleging that the Boy
Scouts had violated the New Jersey statute prohibiting
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in places
of public accommodation. The Boy Scouts, a private, not-
for-pro t organization, asserted that homosexual
conduct was inconsistent with the values it was
attempting to instill in young people. The New Jersey
Superior Court held that New Jersey's public
accommodations law was inapplicable because the Boy
Scouts was not a place of public accommodation. The
court also concluded that the Boy Scouts' First
Amendment freedom of expressive association prevented
the government from forcing the Boy Scouts to accept
Dale as an adult leader. The court's Appellate Division
held that New Jersey's public accommodations law
applied to the Boy Scouts because of its broad-based
membership solicitation and its connections with various
public entities, and that the Boy Scouts violated it by
revoking Dale's membership based on his homosexuality.
The court rejected the Boy Scouts' federal constitutional
claims. The New Jersey Supreme Court a rmed. The
court held that application of New Jersey's public
accommodations law did not violate the Boy Scouts' First
Amendment right of expressive association because
Dale's inclusion would not signi cantly a ect members'
abilities to carry out their purpose. Furthermore, the
court concluded that reinstating Dale did not compel the
Boy Scouts to express any message.

Question
Does the application of New Jersey's public
accommodations law violate the Boy Scouts' First
Amendment right of expressive association to bar

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/99699 2/3
3/13/2017 BoyScoutsofAmericav.Dale|Oyez
homosexuals from serving as troop leaders?

Conclusion
Sort: by seniority by ideology
54 DECISION FOR BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA

MAJORITY OPINION BY WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST

John Paul Stevens

Antonin Scalia
David H. Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

William H. Rehnquist
Sandra Day O'Connor
Anthony M. Kennedy
Clarence Thomas
Stephen G. Breyer

Yes. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Chief Justice William

H. Rehnquist, the Court held that "applying New Jersey's
public accommodations law to require the Boy Scouts to
admit Dale violates the Boy Scouts' First Amendment
right of expressive association." In e ect, the ruling gives
the Boy Scouts of America a constitutional right to bar
homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. Chief Justice
Rehnquist wrote for the Court that, "[t]he Boy Scouts
asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the
values it seeks to instill," and that a gay troop leader's
presence "would, at the very least, force the organization
to send a message, both to the young members and the
world, that the Boy Scouts accepts homosexual conduct
as a legitimate form of behavior."

Cite this page

APA Bluebook Chicago MLA

"Boy Scouts of America v. Dale." Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/99-699. Accessed 13 Mar. 2017.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/99699 3/3