Federal district Judge David Hamilton's full opinion refusing to amend his earlier order prohibiting sectarian prayer in the Indiana legislature has now become available. (See prior postings 1, 2 .) Largely unreported before was he fact that Hinrichs v. Bosma II, (Dec. 28, 2005), contains an interesting holding on standing. While most of the plaintiffs in the case based their claims on their standing as taxpayers, one, Anthony Hinrichs, also was a lobbyist who had listened to many of the prayers. After the trial of the case, Hinrichs' employer, Indiana Friends Committee on Legislation, fired him as a lobbyist because of the litigation and his position on legislative prayer. In its Dec. 28 decision the court held that even though standing of plaintiffs is now based only on taxpayer status, the court is not required to limit its injunction to merely prohibiting the expenditure of public funds on sectarian prayer, but can prohibit such prayers even if they are financed in other ways.
The court also clarified that the injunction purposely did not require the Speaker of the House to obtain advance assurances from those offering legislative prayers that they would be non-sectarian, nor does it require the Speaker to interrupt a prayer if it turns out to be sectarian. But the Speaker must give pointed advice about sectarianism in inviting individuals to deliver prayers. Finally the court clarified what is a "sectarian" Christian prayer. "Prayers are sectarian in the Christian tradition when they proclaim or otherwise communicate the beliefs that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God, or the Savior, or that he was resurrected, or that he will return on Judgment Day or is otherwise divine. "
