HR-5505-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 730.
Sponsored by Tim Walberg (R-MI)
What it does
This bill would add a section to the Higher Education Act of 1965 stating that no funds made available under that Act may be provided to a public institution of higher education that denies a religious student organization any right, benefit, or privilege given to other student organizations. This includes full facility access and official recognition. The condition applies when the denial is because of the group's religious beliefs, practices, speech, leadership standards, or standards of conduct. Other limits apply, and the bill does not define enforcement procedures.
Who benefits
Religious student groups (such as Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or other faith-based clubs) at public colleges that may have been denied recognition or facility access over their beliefs or leadership rules. Students who want to join groups that select leaders who share the group's faith. Advocates of religious expression on campus, who would gain a clear federal funding condition in statute.
Who is hurt
Public colleges that may risk losing Higher Education Act funds and could face compliance and legal costs. Schools that apply uniform nondiscrimination policies to all groups, which may have to change them for religious groups. Students, including LGBTQ students and members of other faith or no faith, who may be excluded from leadership or membership in recognized groups. Student organizations that follow the school's policies and may lose the same policy protections.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that religious student groups have faced derecognition or loss of facility access at some public campuses for requiring leaders to share their faith, which they contend is basic to a religious group's identity. They argue the bill would write into statute protections that the Equal Access Act (for secondary schools) and cases like Widmar v. Vincent already provide, giving colleges a clear funding incentive to treat religious groups equally with other groups.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue the bill would override campus policies that require all recognized groups to follow the same nondiscrimination rules, and could allow groups to exclude students from membership or leadership based on religion or other protected traits. They argue that the funding threat is broad because it reaches all Higher Education Act funds, and that courts already provide remedies under the First Amendment, making a new federal funding condition unnecessary and intrusive on campus governance.
Constitutional context
The bill rests on Congress's Spending Clause power, so South Dakota v. Dole (1987) governs whether the condition is clearly stated, related to the federal interest, and not coercive. The Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses are also relevant: Widmar v. Vincent (1981) required equal access for religious groups at public universities, while Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010) upheld a school's all-comers policy, a tension this bill would address.
Checks and balances
Congress sets the funding condition and the Department of Education would likely administer it, while courts review disputes under the First Amendment and Spending Clause; the bill specifies no enforcement process, leaving that authority to the executive branch.
Historical precedent
The Equal Access Act of 1984 similarly required public secondary schools receiving federal funds to give religious student groups equal access to meeting space.