Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-1371.pdf
Page Number: 29

Cite as:  561 U. S. ____ (2010) 

23 

Opinion of the Court 

ual orientation, but rather “on the basis of a conjunction of 
conduct  and  the  belief  that  the  conduct  is  not  wrong.”
Brief  for  Petitioner  35–36  (emphasis  deleted).    Our  deci­
sions  have  declined  to  distinguish  between  status  and 
conduct in this context.  See Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 
558,  575  (2003)  (“When  homosexual  conduct  is  made 
criminal by the law of the State, that declaration in and of 
itself  is  an  invitation  to  subject  homosexual  persons  to 
discrimination.”  (emphasis  added));  id.,  at  583  (O’Connor,
J., concurring in judgment) (“While it is true that the law 
applies only to conduct, the conduct targeted by this law is
conduct  that  is  closely  correlated  with  being  homosexual.
Under  such  circumstances,  [the]  law  is  targeted  at  more
than conduct.  It is instead directed toward gay persons as 
a  class.”);  cf.  Bray  v.  Alexandria  Women’s  Health  Clinic, 
506 U. S. 263, 270 (1993) (“A tax on wearing yarmulkes is 
a tax on Jews.”).  See also Brief for Lambda Legal Defense
and Education Fund, Inc., et al. as Amici Curiae 7–20. 

Third,  the  Law  School  reasonably  adheres  to  the  view
that  an  all-comers  policy,  to  the  extent  it  brings  together
individuals with diverse backgrounds and beliefs, “encour­
ages  tolerance,  cooperation,  and  learning  among  stu­
dents.”  App. 349.19  And if the policy sometimes produces 
discord,  Hastings  can  rationally  rank  among  RSO­
program  goals  development  of  conflict-resolution  skills, 
toleration, and readiness to find common ground. 

Fourth,  Hastings’  policy,  which  incorporates—in  fact,
subsumes—state-law  proscriptions  on  discrimination, 
conveys  the  Law  School’s  decision “to  decline to  subsidize 
with  public  monies  and  benefits  conduct  of  which  the 

—————— 

19 CLS’s predecessor organization, the Hastings Christian Fellowship
(HCF),  experienced  these  benefits  first-hand  when  it  welcomed  an 
openly gay student as a member during the 2003–2004 academic year.
That student, testified another HCF member, “was a joy to have” in the 
group and brought a unique perspective to Bible-study discussions.  See
App. 325, 327.