Boy Scouts of America v. Dale
"Boy Scouts of America v. Dale" is a landmark Supreme Court case that addressed the intersection of private organization rights and discrimination based on sexual orientation. The case began when James Dale, an openly gay former Scout who was dismissed from his position as an assistant scoutmaster, filed a lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) in 1992, arguing that his dismissal constituted discrimination. The BSA defended its policies by asserting its right to uphold a moral code that required leaders to adhere to heterosexual norms as outlined in their Scout Oath.
In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the BSA is a private organization, entitled under the First Amendment to exclude individuals who do not align with its values, including those based on sexual orientation. This ruling affirmed the organization's ability to set its own standards for membership and leadership, sidestepping broader antidiscrimination laws. The decision sparked significant public discourse on LGBTQ+ rights and discrimination, as it highlighted the policies and biases within the BSA. The case also prompted some supporters and donors to reconsider their affiliations with the organization, reflecting a growing awareness and sensitivity towards issues of diversity and inclusion within private associations.
On this Page
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale
The Case: US Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of excluding openly gay individuals from serving as Boy Scout leaders
Date: Decided on June 28, 2000
By classifying Boy Scouts as a private group rather than a public entity, the Supreme Court ruled that excluding Scout leaders on the basis of sexual orientation is protected under the First Amendment. The ruling declared that these restrictive policies do not violate antidiscrimination laws.
James Dale had been a Boy Scout member from a young age. In 1989, he became an assistant scoutmaster in New Jersey. But in 1990, in response to public acknowledgement of his homosexuality in a newspaper, Dale was dismissed from his position in Boy Scouts of America (BSA). Citing discrimination, Dale and his lawyers from Lambda Legal, a group committed to protecting gay rights, filed a lawsuit against BSA in 1992.
Boy Scouts of America holds its scouts and leaders to the Scout Oath, a commitment to “keep myself . . . morally straight.” This phrase, “morally straight,” is expounded upon in the 1959 and 1979 versions of the Boy Scout Handbook, which specifically tie morality among members to heterosexuality. As moral role models, BSA argues, leaders must commit to the morality implicit in the Scout Oath.
Initially, the New Jersey Superior Court ruled in favor of BSA. Following this, the state appeals court and state supreme court cited the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), favoring Dale. Appealing this ruling, BSA took the case to the US Supreme Court, where a divided court upheld BSA’s First Amendment freedom of association on a vote of five to four. Justice William Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion, affirming BSA as a private entity entitled to hold its leaders to its own standards.
During the proceedings, the American Psychological Association (APA) filed a brief in support of gay Scout leaders. The brief promotes antidiscrimination policies as an effective way to reduce hate crimes and the resulting psychological harm. The brief also cites research that demonstrates how leadership ability is not affected by sexual orientation and refutes claims that homosexuality causes dangerous behavior. The real danger, the APA contended, is the threat of discrimination to the public wellbeing.
Impact
While the Supreme Court’s decision in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale maintained the constitutionality of discrimination in the BSA and, implicitly, any private group, the case garnered attention for the issue of discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gay rights advocates saw this case as a milestone when two New Jersey courts recognized and condemned such discrimination. Additionally, arguments surrounding the Supreme Court case filtered into the public mind and discourse. The case also revealed specific policies and biases inherent in Boy Scouts of America, which led some donors to cut ties with the organization.
Bibliography
“Boy Scouts of America v. Dale.” Lambda Legal. Lambda Legal, 2012. Web. 10 Aug. 2012.
McHugh, James L., and Nathalie F. P. Gilfoyle. “Brief of Amicus Curiae American Psychological Association in Support of Respondent.” American Psychological Association. American Psychological Association, 29 Mar. 2000. Web. 10 Aug. 2012.
Mechling, Jay. On My Honor: Boy Scouts and the Making of American Youth. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2001. Print.