Page:Novoa v. Diaz.pdf/87

 Court noted on the record at the hearing, the undersigned clerked for one of the Eleventh Circuit judges on the Bishop panel, and that judge was certainly smart enough to know the difference between a bright-line rule and a balancing test. Tr. at 17. Bishop explicitly adopted a balancing test. Full stop.

So, what does Bishop require this Court to do? Before discussing the analytical framework in depth and applying it to Plaintiffs’ claims, this Court briefly describes the case itself. Bishop involved an exercise physiology professor at the University of Alabama who challenged the University’s restriction on his class discussions, which included religious matters that the University deemed outside the scope of his required course content. The professor would refer to his religious beliefs during instructional time and, on the eve of exams, offered an “after-class meeting for his students and others … wherein he lectured on and discussed ‘Evidences of God in Human Physiology.’ ” Id.

After receiving a few complaints from students, the University issued a memo to the professor about “Religious Activities in a Public Institution.” Bishop, 926 F.2d at 1069. The University’s memo advised that the professor’s references to his