Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Young Israel of Tampa, Inc. v. Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 22-11787 · judgment January 10, 2024


Certiorari denied · October 7, 2024
Pre-decision estimate: 8% cert probability (95% interval 5%–12%)

Before the decision, about 1.9× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a circuit split argued in the petition, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and an Eleventh Circuit decision below, and down for a state or local-government respondent.

Question presented

Young Israel of Tampa is an Orthodox Jewish synagogue that sought to advertise its annual Chanukah celebration on public buses run by the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority. HART accepts a wide variety of advertisements on its buses, including for secular holiday events, but rejected Young Israel’s ad based on a policy banning ads that “primarily promote a religious faith or religious organization.” This Court has repeatedly held that similar religious-speech bans constitute impermissible viewpoint discrimination. E.g., Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (1995). Even so, there is a 5-3 circuit split over Rosenberger’s application to religious-speech bans in government fora. Five circuits hold that such bans are necessarily viewpoint discrimination—without the need to inquire into a ban’s “reasonableness.” Three circuits hold that governments can ban religion as a “subject matter” if they have “reasonable” standards for doing so. Acknowledging a “circuit split,” the court below declined to hold that HART’s policy was viewpoint discriminatory. Instead, it held that the policy was “unreasonable” for “lack of standards and guidance”— thereby curtailing Young Israel’s injunctive relief and siding with the circuits holding that bans on religious speech are not inherently viewpoint discriminatory. The question presented is: Whether a public transit agency’s ban on advertisements that “primarily promote a religious faith or religious organization” violates the First Amendment’s prohibition on religious viewpoint discrimination.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Luke W. Goodrich
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty

For respondent
David Whitney Adams
Bennett, Jacobs & Adams, P.A.

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Amicus briefs
4 cert-stage

Proceedings

  1. Oct 07 2024
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Aug 14 2024
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
  3. Aug 09 2024
    Reply of petitioner Young Israel of Tampa, Inc. filed.
  4. Jul 26 2024
    Brief of respondent Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority in opposition filed.
  5. Jul 05 2024
    Brief amicus curiae of Protect The First Foundation filed.
  6. Jul 05 2024
    Brief amici curiae of Christian Legal Society, et al. filed.
  7. Jul 05 2024
    Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Law Scholars filed.
  8. Jul 05 2024
    Brief amici curiae of Alabama, et al. filed.
  9. Jun 28 2024
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 26, 2024.
  10. Jun 24 2024
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 5, 2024 to July 26, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
  11. Jun 03 2024
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 5, 2024)