Michelangelo Project v. Springfield Public Arts Council

Case Type:

Exigence:

"(1) projects and productions which have substantial artistic and cultural significance, giving emphasis to Springfieldian creativity and cultural diversity and to the maintenance and encouragement of professional excellence;

"(2) projects and productions, meeting professional standards or standards of authenticity or tradition, irrespective of origin, which are of significant merit and which, without such assistance, would otherwise be unavailable to our citizens for geographic or economic reasons;

"(3) projects and productions that will encourage and assist artists and enable them to achieve wider distribution of their works, to work in residence at an educational or cultural institution, or to achieve standards of professional excellence;

"(4) projects and productions that will encourage public knowledge, education, understanding, and appreciation of the arts."

The law further directed:

"artistic excellence and artistic merit are the criteria by which applications shall be judged, taking into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the Springfieldian public"

SPAC has an annual budget from the City of $250,000

The Michelangelo Project is a not-for-profit corporation that owns a full sized (approx. 15 feet), high quality reproduction of Michelangelo's David. The Project's goal is to arrange for the statue to be displayed in different cities throughout the United States.

The Project submits an application to SPAC, requesting that the David be installed in the public park in front of Springfield City Hall for a year . That space is currently not being used to display any other art, nor has anyone else applied to SPAC to use it. The Project requests $25,000 to cover the costs of installation, removal and insurance.

SPAC holds public hearings on the Project's request. Leaders within the Orthodox Jewish, Muslim, and conservative Catholic and Protestant communities testify about the importance of David in their traditions, and affirm that the public display of this nude statue would show deep disrespect to their religious beliefs. SPAC also receives petitions signed by several thousand Springfieldians which assert that the statue is indecent and that displaying it would violate the values with which they are trying to raise their children.

SPAC denies the Project's request for space and funds. In its denial, SPAC concludes that although the artistic excellence and merit of the David is undeniable, "taking into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the Springfieldian public" the Project is not suitable for funding.

The Michelangelo Project sues, claiming its First Amendment rights have been violated. The district court and appellate court uphold SPAC's decision.

Audience:

Possible
Constraints:

• Rust v. Sullivan, S&C 432
• Rosenberger v. University of Virginia (packet)
• Finley v. NEA (online)

Please note: It was up to SPAC to determine the facts; it is not up to you. In other words, you must assume that SPAC was right to decide that the statue failed to meet "general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the Springfieldian public."

Note #2: For this case, you are the U.S. Supreme Court. Every case you have ever decided is a precedent which binds your decision in this one.

Decision:

Related
issues:

Notes:

For help
with these categories.