AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
Southwestern Michigan Branch
P. O. Box 50332
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49005
February 17, 2016
VIA FAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL
William M. Kosmider, Park Manager
Fort Custer Recreation Area
5163 Fort Custer Drive
Augusta, MI 49012
Re: Baptism USA Ministries
Dear Mr. Kosmider
The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan and our Southwestern Michigan Branch were
contacted by Rev. William Stein, the founder of Baptism USA Ministries in connection with your letter to him
dated May 28, 2002. In the letter you indicated that his request for permission to conduct baptisms at Eagle
Lake was denied because it was “. . . assumed that [Baptism USA Ministries’] activities would dominate the
activities of a popular beach on several summer weekends, and may conflict with other user’s enjoyment.” See
attached copy of letter. You further cited as a basis for your denial of Rev. Stein’s request Department of
Natural Resources (“DNR”), Parks and Recreation Bureau Policy 8.15 which requires that any religious
activity in the park be interdenominational in nature, and that such activities not conflict with other users.
On behalf of Rev. Stein and the ACLU of Michigan, I must respectfully disagree that the DNR may
deny Rev. Stein and his ministry the right to conduct baptisms at Eagle Lake when such constitutionally
protected activities do not otherwise violate DNR park regulations. Prohibiting Rev. Stein from conducting
baptisms at Eagle Lake violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution for the
reasons set forth below.
First Amendment
Rev. Stein’s proposed activities have long been protected by the United States Constitution. The
United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that “ . . . [i]n places which by long tradition or by
government fiat have been devoted to assembly and debate, the rights of the State to limit expressive activity
are sharply circumscribed.” Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n, 460 U.S. 37, 45 (1983). A
public park is a traditional public forum. Id. at 45. The state may not regulate the content of the speech in
traditional public forums unless the state can demonstrate that such regulation is necessary to serve a
compelling state interest and that it is narrowly tailored to achieve that end. The state may regulate the time,
place, and manner of the expression, as long as the regulations are content-neutral, are narrowly tailored to
serve a significant government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of communication. Id. at 45
(citations omitted).
You have denied Rev. Stein a permit based on the content of his expressive activity, without any
content-neutral basis to believe his activities will otherwise violate DNR rules. Other religious groups are
allowed to hold functions at the Eagle Lake, as well as non-religious groups. Your denial of a permit to
Baptism USA Ministries appears plainly based on the sectarian nature of Rev. Stein’s activities, and is clearly
impermissible under the Constitution.
The reason the DNR may be denying permits to religious groups (other than so-called
“interdenominational” groups) is to steer clear from the appearance that it is endorsing one religion over
another. While perhaps well-meaning, such action is a clear violation of the free speech clause of the First
Amendment. This is not a case where the government is sponsoring or endorsing religious activities; rather it
is one where government is denying a private group the right to engage in speech based on the content of the
speech.
The Court has made it clear that the Establishment Clause is not a defense to prohibiting religious
groups access to public forums. Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981) (university required to open
classroom to student religious club because such classrooms generally open to all student sponsored groups);
Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753 (1995) (“Religious expression cannot
violate the Establishment Clause where it (1) is purely private and (2) occurs in a traditional or designated
public forum, publicly announced and open to all on equal terms”); Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of
University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995) (university may not deny eligibility for disbursement of funds
based on the religious viewpoint of the particular publication seeking funds). Religious groups, such as
Baptism USA Ministries have as much right to utilize public forums to engage in expressive activity conveying
their particular viewpoint as any group or individual, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner
restrictions.
In the case of Poulos v. New Hampshire, 345 U.S. 395 (1953), a group of Jehovah’s Witnesses were
denied a permit to hold a religious service in a public park. Other religious groups had held services there and
several non-religious groups were allowed to hold functions there. The Jehovah’s Witnesses were denied use
of the park based solely upon the content of the service that they were conducting. Id. at 397. The Court
condemned the licensing systems which vests in an administrative official, such as yourself, with the discretion
to grant or withhold a permit upon broad criteria unrelated to proper regulation of public places. Poulos, supra,
345 U.S. 395, 408 (1953). The Court has made it clear that one who is granted authority to grant or deny
permits may not do so based upon the content of the speech or expressive activity of the individual or group
requesting such a permit. See also Niemetko v. Maryland, 340 U.S. 268 (1951).
Equal Protection
Denying Rev. Stein a permit while allowing other religious groups to hold functions there is an
abridgment of Rev. Stein’s rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. “Once a
forum is opened up to assembly or speaking by some groups, government may not prohibit others from
assembling or speaking on the basis of what they intend to say. Selective exclusions from a public forum may
not be based on content alone, and may not be justified by reference to content alone.” Police Dept. of the City
of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 96 (1972).
This letter serves as the ACLU’s respectful request that a permit be immediately issued to Rev. Stein
and Baptism USA Ministries to conduct baptism services at Eagle Lake on July 13 and 20, and on August 3,
10 and 17, 2002. However, if the DNR or you continue to maintain the position that you can prohibit a
citizen’s right to freely exercise his religious beliefs in a public forum such as Eagle Lake, the ACLU of
Michigan is prepared to commence an action to enforce Baptism USA Ministries and Rev. Stein’s rights under
the law, and will seek every available remedy.
I would appreciate it if you would contact me at your earliest possible convenience to advise whether
the DNR will issue a permit as requested. We would very much like to resolve this issue amicably without the
need for legal action. If you or your lawyers would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact
the undersigned as set forth below, or Michael J. Steinberg, Legal Director of the ACLU of Michigan at (313)
578-6814. We look forward to hearing from you.
2
Very truly yours,
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN BRANCH
James N. Rodbard, President
Contact info:
James N. Rodbard
405 W. Michigan Ave., Suite 130
Kalamazoo, MI 49007
(616) 342-6000
(616) 388-5454
jnrket@aol.com
cc:
Michael J. Steinberg
Rev. William Stein
K.L. Cool
3