Opinion ID: 2798302
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Initial Review Process

Text: At the outset of this dispute, the defendant School Board allowed groups outside the school to passively distribute materials at public schools in what both parties agree amounted to a limited public forum. The School District would approve the materials prior to any distribution. On January 16, 2013, the defendant School Board allowed World Changers of Florida (“WCF”) to passively distribute copies of the New International Version Bible (“NIV Bible”) to students at eleven of the public schools within the School Board district. Plaintiff FFRF opposed this distribution, arguing to the School Board that it should not allow WCF to distribute its materials. As an alternative, plaintiff FFRF sought to distribute its own material, which included “atheist, 1 Separately, we find plaintiff FFRF’s allegations of abuse of discretion in the district court’s discovery management to be without merit. 2 Case: 14-13399 Date Filed: 05/04/2015 Page: 3 of 10 humanist, and freethought literature.” The initial review and denial of some of that material gave rise to this litigation. The defendant School Board informed plaintiff FFRF that it would have to submit the materials planned for distribution in advance to ensure that such materials were not among the material the School Board may prohibit. 2 On January 29, 2013, plaintiff FFRF submitted materials for advance approval. These materials included nine “nontracts,” five brochures, eight books, one essay, and one sticker. The FFRF voluntary rescinded three of the books that it had submitted for approval. Of the remaining materials, the School Board prohibited distribution of four “nontracts,” the essay, four books, and the sticker. The School Board also issued a distribution date of May 2, 2013. Plaintiff FFRF protested the defendant School Board’s prohibition of six materials, alleging that the defendant had illegally discriminated against the 2 The School Board has no written policy regarding distribution of materials, but rather follows the Collier County Consent Decree, entered by a district court in the Middle District of Florida in World Changers of Fla., Inc. v. Dist. Sch. Bd. of Collier Cnty., Fla., No. 2:10–cv–419– FtM–36SPC. There, the consent decree made plain that “no [school board] decisionmaker c[ould] exercise discretion to deny access to the limited public forum on basis of viewpoint,” but also granted the school board the authority to prohibit, in advance, certain materials for reasons other than the viewpoints expressed. That consent decree allowed prohibition of literature that: (i) promoted the use of alcohol, tobacco, or illegal drugs; (ii) advertised products or services for sale; (iii) was not appropriate for the age and maturity of high school students; (iv) was pornographic, obscene, or libelous; (v) violated intellectual property or privacy rights; (vi) advocated or was likely to incite imminent lawless action; or (vii) was likely to cause substantial disruption at the school despite the application of available discipline rules and procedures. Neither party to this case is a party to the Collier County Consent Decree, but the School Board maintains that the consent decree serves as a template for its evaluation of materials presented for distribution in a limited public forum. 3 Case: 14-13399 Date Filed: 05/04/2015 Page: 4 of 10 viewpoints contained in those materials. The FFRF again requested that the School Board close the forum to all outside groups. On May 2, 2013, the FFRF passively distributed the approved materials to students at public schools within the defendant’s district.