Bob jones university race dating
Whatever may be the rationale for such private schools' policies, racial discrimination in education is contrary to public policy. (c) The IRS did not exceed its authority when it announced its interpretation of 501(c)(3) in 19. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, and O'CONNOR, JJ., joined, and in Part III of which POWELL, J., joined. Racially discriminatory educational institutions cannot be viewed as conferring a public benefit within the above "charitable" concept or within the congressional intent underlying 501(c)(3). Such interpretation is wholly consistent with what Congress, the Executive, and the courts had previously declared. (d) The Government's fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on petitioners' exercise of their religious beliefs. (e) The IRS properly applied its policy to both petitioners. POWELL, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, post, p. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. Montgomery for the National Association of Evangelicals; and by Congressman Trent Lott, pro se. Inman for the International Human Rights Law Group; by Robert H. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed, 644 F.2d 879 (1981) (per curiam). organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable . Petitioners argue that the plain language of the statute guarantees them tax-exempt status. This "charitable" concept appears explicitly in 170 of the Code. Ellis for the Center for Law and Religious Freedom of the Christian Legal Society; by Forest D. Raim for the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith; by John H. Lake, and Adam Yarmolinsky for Independent Sector; by Amy Young-Anawaty, David Carliner, Burt Neuborne, and Harry A. Accordingly, the court entered summary judgment for the IRS on its counterclaim. or educational purposes" are entitled to tax exemption. Such an examination reveals unmistakable evidence that, underlying all relevant parts of the Code, is the intent that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common-law standards of charity - namely, that an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be contrary to established public policy. "A charitable use, where neither law nor public policy forbids, may be applied to almost any thing that tends to promote the well-doing and well-being of social man." Ould v. The origins of such exemptions lie in the special privileges that have long been extended to charitable trusts. And it is well settled that, in interpreting a statute, the court will not look merely to a particular clause in which general words may be used, but will take in connection with it the whole statute . Tax exemptions for certain institutions thought beneficial to the social order of the country as a whole, or to a particular community, are deeply rooted in our history, as in that of England. And the actions of Congress since 1970 leave no doubt that the IRS reached the correct conclusion in exercising its authority. Petitioners' asserted interests cannot be accommodated with that compelling governmental interest, and no less restrictive means are available to achieve the governmental interest. Goldsboro admits that it maintains racially discriminatory policies, and, contrary to Bob Jones University's contention that it is not racially discriminatory, discrimination on the basis of racial affiliation and association is a form of racial discrimination.
The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina held that revocation of the University's tax-exempt status exceeded the delegated powers of the IRS, was improper under the IRS rulings and procedures, and violated the University's rights under the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment. Finally, the Court of Appeals rejected petitioner's arguments that the revocation of the tax exemption violated the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment. 6 Goldsboro has for the most part accepted only Caucasians.
It is both a religious and educational institution. In 1861, this Court stated that a public charitable use must be "consistent with local laws and public policy," Perin v. Modern commentators and courts have echoed that view. g., Restatement (Second) of Trusts 377, Comment c (1959); 4 Scott 377, and cases cited therein; Bogert 378, at 191-192. "The right of a student not to be segregated on racial grounds in schools .
Bob Jones University is not affiliated with any religious denomination, but is dedicated to the teaching and propagation of its fundamentalist Christian religious beliefs. 16 A corollary to the public benefit principle is the requirement, long recognized in the law of trusts, that the purpose of a charitable trust may not be illegal or violate established public policy. Over the past quarter of a century, every pronouncement of this Court and myriad Acts of Congress and Executive Orders attest a firm national policy to prohibit racial segregation and discrimination in public education. Board of Education establishes beyond doubt this Court's view that racial discrimination in education violates a most fundamental national public policy, as well as rights of individuals. is indeed so fundamental and pervasive that it is embraced in the concept of due process of law." Cooper v.
The court also held that racially discriminatory private schools were not entitled to exemption under 501(c)(3) and that donors were not entitled to deductions for contributions to such schools under 170. 3 The application of the IRS construction of these provisions to petitioners, two private schools with racially discriminatory admissions policies, is now before us. Entering students are screened as to their religious beliefs, and their public and private conduct is strictly regulated by standards promulgated by University authorities. 15 "The exemption from taxation of money or property devoted to charitable and other purposes is based upon the theory that the Government is compensated for the loss of revenue by its relief from financial burdens which would otherwise have to be met by appropriations from other public funds, and by the benefits resulting from the promotion of the general welfare." H. 18 History buttresses logic to make clear that, to warrant exemption under 501(c)(3), an institution must fall within a category specified in that section and must demonstrably serve and be in harmony with the public interest.
That court approved the IRS's amended construction of the Tax Code. All charitable trusts, educational or otherwise, are subject to the requirement that the purpose of the trust may not be illegal or contrary to public policy." Based on the "national policy to discourage racial discrimination in education," the IRS ruled that "a [private] school not having a racially nondiscriminatory policy as to students is not `charitable' within the common law concepts reflected in sections 170 and 501(c)(3) of the Code." Id., at 231. ., giving special emphasis to the Christian religion and the ethics revealed in the Holy Scriptures." Certificate of Incorporation, Bob Jones University, Inc., of Greenville, S. Its teachers are required to be devout Christians, and all courses at the University are taught according to the Bible. 17 When the Government grants exemptions or allows deductions all taxpayers are affected; the very fact of the exemption or deduction for the donor means that other taxpayers can be said to be indirect and vicarious "donors." Charitable exemptions are justified on the basis that the exempt entity confers a public benefit - a benefit which the society or the community may not itself choose or be able to provide, or which supplements and advances the work of public institutions already supported by tax revenues.