Indiana federal district court judge David Hamilton has written an extensive opinion supporting his refusal to stay his injunction, pending appeal, in the case that prohibited further sectarian prayer in the Indiana House of Representatives. In Hinrichs v. Bosma III, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4740 (SD Ind., Jan. 24, 2006), the court held: "The defendant has not shown that he or others will suffer cognizable irreparable harm by complying with the injunction while the appeal goes forward. The injunction allows official non-sectarian prayers like those the Supreme Court approved in Marsh. Neither the defendant nor any other person has a constitutional right to use an official prayer to express and advance his personal religious beliefs. The balance of harms also weighs against a stay."
In concluding that House Speaker Bosma had showed no irreparable harm, the court said: "The Speaker's claim that the injunction interferes with his 'ability to accommodate the religious needs of those who lead these prayers' reflects a persistent misunderstanding of the court's decision and of the applicable law. All individuals -- the Speaker, all House Members, and any guests who might be invited to offer an official prayer -- retain the right to pray and worship as they see fit in private and non-official settings."
Discussing applicable precedents at length, the court said that it was not persuaded that defendants were likely to succeed on appeal either on their challenge to plaintiffs' standing or on the merits of the case. (See prior related postings 1, 2, 3.)
