Case: YU Pride Alliance v. Yeshiva University

This is a case alleging that Yeshiva University, its Vice Provost of Student Affairs, and its President violated the New York City Human Rights Law by refusing to officially recognize YU Pride Alliance, an unofficial undergraduate student organization for LGBTQ students and their allies. On April 26, 2021, the Yeshiva University Pride Alliance and four current and former students of Yeshiva University filed this lawsuit in New York state trial court alleging that the university discriminated against them on the basis of gender and sexual orientation (N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(4)) and association (N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(20)). According to the complaint, the university had refused to recognize the YU Pride Alliance as an official organization and as a result denied them the benefits and accommodations that recognized clubs receive on campus. The case was assigned to Judge Lynn R. Kotler.
 
The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought declaratory and injunctive relief in the form of recognition by Yeshiva University as an official club as well as attorneys’ fees and punitive damages for injuries suffered. 
 
The defendants filed a notice of a motion to dismiss on June 3, 2021, asserting that they were a religious corporation exempt from the NYC Human Rights Law. In early September, the court converted the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. On December 17, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment arguing that Yeshiva University was an educational institution, not a religious corporation, and therefore not exempt from the NYC Human Rights Law.  
 
On June 14, 2022, Judge Kottler granted the plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment, denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and permanently enjoined the defendants from refusing to officially recognize YU Pride Alliance as a student organization. The court rejected Yeshiva University's argument that they were a religious corporation, finding that Yeshiva's own charter described the institution as "an educational corporation under the Education Law . . . organized and operated exclusively for educational purposes." Based on this language and other statements made by Yeshiva faculty and community members, the court determined that the university was an educational institution and therefore the NYC Human Rights Law applied to them. The court directed the university to immediately provide the plaintiffs with all benefits that other student organizations receive. 2022 WL 2158381.

The defendants appealed this decision on June 24, 2022. 
 
On August 29, 2022, the defendants filed an emergency application for stay of the permanent injunction pending appellate review with the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied the application for stay on September 14, 2022, on the basis that the defendants still had two more avenues of relief to pursue in state court before the trial court's decision would become final, including the option to request expedited review from the appellate court. 2022 WL 4232541.

Within days, Yeshiva University announced that it was halting all undergraduate student organization activities on campus in response to the Supreme Court's decision not to stay the lower court's ruling. The New York Appellate Division agreed to rehear its earlier denial of Yeshiva's request to stay the trial court's order. According to media reports, the two parties agreed to a stay while litigation continued, with oral argument before the appellate court expected sometime in November 2022. 

In mid-October, the ACLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and Americans United filed an amicus brief in support of the student organization, arguing that the church autonomy doctrine does not bar courts from applying anti-discrimination laws to religious organizations.

On December 15, 2022, the New York Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s injunction against Yeshiva University. The appellate court held that Yeshiva University was not a religious corporation and did not qualify for any exemptions for religious institutions. In addition, it held that requiring the university to give the Pride Alliance equal access to public accommodations did not violate the university’s First Amendment right to decide religious doctrinal issues or to freedom of expression and association because recognizing an organization does not entail endorsing it. Further, the court held that Yeshiva University’s First Amendment right to free exercise was not violated because the public accommodations law at issue was neutral and generally applicable. 180 N.Y.S.3d 141.

 As of November 21, 2023, the case is ongoing, with discovery ongoing over the plaintiffs’ damages claims.