Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 303.0

529US1

Unit: $U39

[09-26-01 13:21:31] PAGES PGT: OPIN

228

BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. OF WIS. SYSTEM
v. SOUTHWORTH
Opinion of the Court

protecting the objecting students’ free speech rights was “of
heightened concern” following our decision in Rosenberger v.
Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U. S. 819 (1995),
because “[i]f the university cannot discriminate in the dis-
bursement of funds, it is imperative that students not be
compelled to fund organizations which engage in political and
ideological activities—that is the only way to protect the in-
dividual’s rights.” 151 F. 3d, at 730, n. 11. The Court of
Appeals extended the District Court’s order and enjoined
the board of regents from requiring objecting students to
pay that portion of the fee used to fund RSO’s engaged in
political or ideological expression.

Id., at 735.

Three members of the Court of Appeals dissented from
the denial of the University’s motion for rehearing en banc.
In their view, the panel opinion overlooked the “crucial dif-
ference between a requirement to pay money to an organi-
zation that explicitly aims to subsidize one viewpoint to
the exclusion of other viewpoints, as in Abood and Keller,
and a requirement to pay a fee to a group that creates a
viewpoint-neutral forum, as is true of the student activity
fee here.” Southworth v. Grebe, 157 F. 3d 1124, 1129 (CA7
1998) (D. Wood, J., dissenting).

Other courts addressing First Amendment challenges to
similar student fee programs have reached conﬂicting re-
sults. Compare Rounds v. Oregon State Bd. of Higher Ed.,
166 F. 3d 1032, 1038–1040 (CA9 1999); Hays County Guard-
ian v. Supple, 969 F. 2d 111, 123 (CA5 1992), cert. denied,
506 U. S. 1087 (1993); Kania v. Fordham, 702 F. 2d 475, 480
(CA4 1983); Good v. Associated Students of Univ. of Wash.,
86 Wash. 2d 94, 105, 542 P. 2d 762, 769 (1975) (en banc), with
Smith v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 4 Cal. 4th 843, 862–863, 844
P. 2d 500, 513–514, cert. denied, 510 U. S. 863 (1993). These
conﬂicts, together with the importance of the issue pre-
sented, led us to grant certiorari. 526 U. S. 1038 (1999).
We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.