Former Student, Local Teacher Take First Step Toward Supreme Court Showdown in 'Jesus Glasses' Case

Chad Farnan, a Capistrano Valley High School graduate, and James Corbett, the history teacher he sued for making disparaging comments about religion, are back in court today.

The case made national headlines and still keeps Internet message boards abuzz in polarized, passionate debate. Both sides are resolute to see the case go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Its next stop along that route is a hearing before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena today.

The lawsuit contends, among other things, that Corbett told students during a 2007 classroom lecture at the Mission Viejo school that "when you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth,"  and that religion is not "connected with morality."

Farnan, now a college freshman, said he’s trying to stay focused on earning his master's degree at Pepperdine University, where he’s in the process of switching his major from business to computer science.

“I'm just working hard in the present right now to make sure I graduate with good grades so I can possibly go to graduate school,” he said.

Farnan may not be thinking about the precedent-setting nature of his case, but the lawyers on both sides sure are.

“As long as we have blood to give, we will fight,” said Farnan’s lawyer, Robert Tyler of Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a not-for-profit in Murrieta that takes on cases which challenge religious liberties.

Farnan taped hours of the teacher’s lessons during an advanced-placement European history class. The class was peppered with discussions of current events and Corbett's own opinions about religion—Christianity in particular—and conservative thoughts.

Farnan included 20 of what he thought were outrageous comments in a lawsuit he filed in December 2007 against Corbett and the school district. Farnan subsequently convinced a federal judge that at least one of the statements—that creationism is “religious, superstitious nonsense”—was unconstitutional.

Corbett has hired Erwin Chemerinsky, dean at UC Irvine’s School of Law, to lead his appellate team. Chemerinsky said he’s concerned that Farnan’s case may have a chilling effect on academic freedom and even on recruiting teachers into the profession.

“No teacher in the history of the United States has been found violating the 'establishment' clause of the First Amendment," Chemerinsky said.  "Teachers will be tremendously chilled. The courts should be very reluctant to impose money damages on teachers."

Meanwhile, the debate continues online, with some declaring Farnan and his parents to be religious fanatics, and others calling Corbett a bully.

The hubbub began May 1, 2009, when District Judge James V. Selna in Santa Ana ruled that one of the statements Farnan recorded during Corbett’s classes violated the student’s First Amendment rights.

That might sound confusing, as Corbett was the one doing the talking, but this is not a case about Corbett’s free-speech rights. This case centers on the very first words of the First Amendment:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….”

The U.S. Supreme Court has found that public officials who demonstrate an open hostility toward a religion or a “religion of secularism” are just as guilty of violating the establishment clause as public officials who proselytize a religion, according to Selna’s decision in the case.

“This case reflects the tension between the constitutional rights of a student and the demands of higher education as reflected in the advanced-placement European history course in which Farnan enrolled,” Selna wrote in an afterward to his written decision, which released the school district from liability.

“It also reflects a tension between Farnan’s deeply held religious beliefs and the need for government, particularly schools, to carry out their duties free of the strictures of any particular religious or philosophical belief system. The Constitution recognizes both sides of the equation.”

Corbett wrote an editorial shortly after the ruling and distributed it to a number of websites. “Every teacher in California (this was a federal case after all) now works with the knowledge that any student, at any time, and in violation of California law, can sneak a tape recorder into a classroom, record the teacher and use an out-of-context, five-second comment as a bludgeon to threaten, to intimidate and, ultimately, to destroy the teacher’s career and good name,” he wrote.

Tyler, Farnan’s lawyer, said the comments were not out of context. He added that he would not have pursued this case had Corbett  made a comment only here or there.

Because there was a constant barrage of derogatory remarks, the teacher created an “impermissibly hostile” learning environment for students who did not agree with his point of view, Tyler wrote in his filings with the 9th Circuit.

“If the establishment clause can be used to silence people of faith, because the pendulum swings both ways, it must also apply to Dr. Corbett,” Tyler told Patch.

Chemerinsky said he doesn’t see how Corbett’s statements can be seen as a violation of the establishment clause.

“Being hostile to religion is not the same as being critical of religion,” Chemerinsky said. Corbett’s remarks err on the side of criticism, he said.