A federal appeals court on Friday tossed out a lower court’s ruling that Capistrano Valley High School teacher James Corbett violated a student’s constitutional rights by making comments disparaging to religion, saying Corbett could not have known he might be breaking the law.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said laws regarding what a teacher can and cannot say about religion are insufficiently clear to indicate whether Corbett violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which courts have interpreted as prohibiting government officials from displaying religious hostility.

“Nothing put Corbett on notice that his statements might violate the Establishment Clause. More to the point, we are aware of no prior case holding that a teacher violated the Establishment Clause by appearing critical of religion during class lectures, nor any case with sufficiently similar facts to give a teacher “fair warning” that such conduct was unlawful,” the ruling states.

Click here to read the ruling in its entirety.

Corbett lauded the ruling as a victory for teachers.

“The court’s opinion was more than gratifying, it was a victory for free thought and academic freedom,” said Corbett, a 38-year educator who has remained a teacher at Capistrano Valley. “The 9th Circuit affirmed that in America, no religion has a right to demand that teachers defer to their beliefs. If that were true, teaching would become a constitutional minefield.”

Robert Tyler, a lawyer with the Advocates for Faith & Freedom legal organization who represented the student, said he would ask the appeals court to reconsider. Tyler also said he would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case if the appeals court doesn’t change its ruling.

“This ruling was a disservice to millions of public school children, parents and teachers,” Tyler said. “It’s quite ironic that while the 9th Circuit complains in the decision that the law is unclear as to whether a public school teacher showed hostility in the classroom, it failed to bring clarity when it had the opportunity to do so. Instead of addressing the constitutionality of the case, the court abandoned it.”

Corbett was sued in 2007 by then-sophomore Chad Farnan, who alleged 22 statements Corbett made during a fall Advanced Placement European history course were disparaging to Christians, including one in which the teacher called Creationism “religious, superstitious nonsense.”

In 2009, U.S. District Court Judge James Selna found that Corbett violated Farnan’s rights with that one statement. Corbett sought and received from Selna “qualified immunity,” a status that shielded him from paying damages or attorneys’ fees to Farnan.

Farnan, currently a student at Pepperdine University, appealed, seeking to toss out the immunity and get the appeals court to reconsider all 22 comments; Corbett’s team, which grew to include constitutional scholar and UC Irvine law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky, appealed as well.

“This was a really important ruling for academic freedom,” said Chemerinsky, who took on the case pro bono. “There has never been a precedent set for something like this before. Teachers should be able to criticize religion just like they can criticize government, business and similar groups without the fear of being sued.”

The appellate court said there are two standards for determining qualified immunity – whether a constitutional right was violated and whether the government official involved could have known he was violating a constitutional right.

“Because it is readily apparent that the law was not clearly established at the time of the events in question, and because we may resolve the appeal on that basis alone, we decline to pass upon the constitutionality of the teacher’s challenged statements,” Judge Raymond Fisher said in the unanimous three-judge ruling.

The ruling tosses out the 2009 decision by Selna that Corbett violated Farnan’s constitutional rights.

“Because we do not reach the constitutionality of any of Corbett’s statements, we vacate the district court’s judgment in that respect,” the ruling states.

The court also noted the importance of academic freedom:

“Academic freedom will sometimes lead to the examination of controversial issues. Both parties agree that AP Euro could not be taught without discussing religion. We have no doubt that the freedom to have a frank discussion about the role of religion in history is an integral part of any advanced history course.

“In broaching controversial issues like religion, teachers must be sensitive to students’ personal beliefs and take care not to abuse their positions of authority. But teachers must also be given leeway to challenge students to foster critical thinking skills and develop their analytical abilities. This balance is hard to achieve, and we must be careful not to curb intellectual freedom by imposing dogmatic restrictions that chill teachers from adopting the pedagogical methods they believe are most effective.”

Corbett said he hopes the ruling will empower more teachers to critically discuss religious concepts in classrooms.

“My classes have Jews, Hindus, Bahai, Muslims, Buddhists, and others,” he said. “Chad would demand a special place for his views, but in America, all beliefs should be treated equally by government.”

Contact the writer: 714-704-3773 or fleal@ocregister.com

The Associated Press contributed to this report.