Opening Of Court Sessions With Prayer Violates Establishment Clause

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mack, (SD TX, May 21, 2021), a Texas federal district court held that a program devised by a Justice of the Peace under which his court sessions are opened with a prayer from a volunteer chaplain violates the Establishment Clause. The court concluded that attendees are impermissibly coerced into participating in religious ritual. It said in part:

The structure of the ceremony, combined with the defendant’s attendant statements about the ceremony’s purpose, is designed to give attendees “a sense of being in the presence of something . . . holy and sacred[.]” ... The Court is of the view that the defendant violates the Establishment Clause when, before a captured audience of litigants and their counsel, he presents himself as theopneustically-inspired, enabling him to advance, through the Chaplaincy Program, God’s “larger purpose.” Such a magnanimous goal flies in the face of historical tradition, and makes a mockery of both, religion and law.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the decision. First Liberty Institute which represents defendant says that it will appeal the decision to the 5th Circuit.

9th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Case of High School Coach Who Prayed At 50-Yard Line

Earlier this week (Jan. 25), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. (Audio, Video of full oral arguments.) In the case, a Washington federal district court dismissed 1st Amendment and Title VII claims by a high school football coach who was suspended when he insisted on prominently praying at the 50-yard line immediately after football games. The court concluded that his prayer amounted to endorsement of religion by the school district in violation of the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) First Liberty issued a press release on Monday's oral argument.

Clergy Who Will Speak At Biden's Inauguration Are Identified

Vox reports that the clergy who will deliver the invocation and benediction at President Joe Biden's inauguration today are men with whom Biden has close personal ties.  Fr. Leo O’Donovan who will deliver the invocation was president of Georgetown University from 1980- 2001. Biden's son Hunter was  student at Georgetown during part of this period.  Rev. Silvester Beaman who will deliver the closing benediction is pastor of the predominately African-American Bethel AME Church in Wilmington, Delaware.

7th Circuit Upholds Prison Rule Limiting Off-Bunk Prayers

In Larry v. Goldsmith, (7th Cir., March 30, 2020), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld as reasonably related to a legitimate penological interest a prison rule that prohibits inmates from praying off their bunks after 9:00 pm. The policy was challenged by a Muslim inmate who was disciplined for praying next to his bunk at a prohibited time.

Attorney Has Standing To Challenge Judge's Prayer Practices

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mack, (SD TX, Jan. 13, 2010), a Texas federal district court held that an attorney has standing to challenge a Texas Justice of the Peace's practice of having his court sessions opened with a prayer. The attorney, who is non-religious, has declined clients in order to avoid the judge's courtroom. The court said in part:

Here, Attorney Roe has offered testimony that he practices law in Montgomery County, Texas, has appeared in Judge Mack’s courtroom on several occasions, and that he avoids the courtroom because of Judge Mack’s practice. The harm alleged does not occur only because he enters the courtroom, but also because he must avoid the courtroom since the practice continues. Therefore, there is a substantive risk that were he to accept a case in Judge Mack’s court, he will be exposed to the prayer practice. Hence, Attorney Roe has satisfied the standing requirements.

Judge Mack also challenges the FFRF’s standing. Because the Court has determined that Attorney Roe has standing, the FFRF has associational standing.

11th Circuit: Christian School Can Proceed In Challenge To Pre-Game Loudspeaker Prayer Ban

In Cambridge Christian School, Inc. v. Florida High School Athletic Association, Inc., (11th Cir., Nov. 13, 2019), the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a Christian school could move ahead with its complaint that its free speech and free exercise rights were infringed when it was denied permission to broadcast a joint prayer over the loudspeaker at the state championship high school football game. Both schools in the playoff were Christian schools. In its 70-page opinion, the court said in part:

As we see it, the district court was too quick to dismiss all of Cambridge Christian’s claims out of hand. Taking the complaint in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, as we must at this stage in the proceedings, the schools’ claims for relief under the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses have been adequately and plausibly pled. There are too many open factual questions for us to say with confidence that the allegations cannot be proven as a matter of law. The question of whether all speech over the microphone was government speech is a heavily fact-intensive one that looks at the history of the government’s use of the medium for communicative purposes, the implication of government endorsement of messages carried over that medium, and the degree of government control over those messages.... [B]ased on this limited record, we find it plausible that the multitude of messages delivered over the loudspeaker should be viewed as private, not government, speech. And while we agree with the district court that the loudspeaker was a nonpublic forum, we conclude that Cambridge Christian has plausibly alleged that it was arbitrarily and haphazardly denied access to the forum in violation of the First Amendment. Likewise, we cannot say, again drawing all inferences in favor of the appellant, that in denying scommunal prayer over the loudspeaker, the FHSAA did not infringe on Cambridge Christian’s free exercise of religion.

WCTV News reports on the decision.

Senior Community Management Sued Over Ban on Bible Study Groups and Public Prayer

A lawsuit was filed this week in a Virginia federal district court by a retired pastor and his wife against a senior living community where they lived.  The complaint (full text) in Hauge v. Community Realty Company, Inc., (ED VA, filed 5/21/2019), alleges that the community's management discriminated against plaintiffs on the basis of religion by acceding to demands of other residents to bar plaintiffs' followers from publicly saying grace before their meals, and prohibiting plaintiffs from hosting Bible Study anywhere in the living complex.  The suit contends that management's actions violated federal and state fair housing laws.  First Liberty issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Air Force JAG OK's Religious References At Change of Command Ceremonies

In a legal opinion issued last December which is just now attracting attention, the U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General has issued an opinion on the permissible extent of religious references during a change of command ceremony.  In OpJAGAF 2018-52 (Dec.19, 2018), the Air Force ruled:

[A] commander may:  briefly thank a Supreme Being (either generally, such as Providence, that Almighty Being, our Lord, or the Supreme Author of All Good; or specifically, such as Allah, Brahman, Christ, Ganesh, God, Yahweh, or even Beelzebub), have an invocation, and choose whomever he or she would like to provide the invocation. If the commander holds a personal promotion ceremony on the same day, a significant break must occur between the change of command and promotion ceremony in order for the commander to be freer in expressing his or her personal religious beliefs.  If a break does not occur, the commander must limit his or her religious comments to comments that are appropriate at the official change of command.

Friendly Atheist and Rewire News  report on the ruling.  The Military Religious Freedom Foundation plans to challenge the ruling.

Supreme Court Remands Case Involving Officers Ordering Suspect To Cease Praying

In Sause v. Bauer, (US Sup. Ct., June 28, 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court in a 4 page per curiam opinion granted certiorari, reversed the 10th Circuit, and remanded for further proceedings a case in which petitioner claimed that her free exercise rights were infringed when police officers in her apartment in response to a noise complaint ordered her to stop praying. The Court said in part:

There can be no doubt that the First Amendment protects the right to pray. Prayer unquestionably constitutes the “exercise” of religion. At the same time, there are clearly circumstances in which a police officer may lawfully prevent a person from praying at a particular time and place. For example, if an officer places a suspect under arrest and orders the suspect to enter a police vehicle for transportation to jail, the suspect does not have a right to delay that trip by insisting on first engaging in conduct that, at another time, would be protected by the First Amendment. When an officer’s order to stop praying is alleged to have occurred during the course of investigative conduct that implicates Fourth Amendment rights, the First and Fourth Amendment issues may be inextricable.

That is the situation here. As the case comes before us, it is unclear whether the police officers were in petitioner’s apartment at the time in question based on her consent, whether they had some other ground consistent with the Fourth Amendment for entering and remaining there, or whether their entry or continued presence was unlawful.... Without knowing the answers to these questions, it is impossible to analyze petitioner’s free exercise claim.

(See prior related posting.)

City Violated Establishment Clause By Sponsoring Prayer Vigil

In Rojas v. City of Ocala, (MD FL, May 24, 2018), a Florida federal district court held that the City of Ocala, Florida and its police chief violated the Establishment Clause when they organized and promoted a prayer vigil in response to a shooting spree plaguing the city.  The vigil resulted from attempts to involve the faith community in encouraging witnesses to cooperate in investigation of the shootings. the court, however, held that the mayor was not liable merely for failing to intervene to prevent the vigil. Ocala Star Banner reports on the decision.

Suit Over Opening Prayers In Courtroom Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mack, (SD TX, Jan. 19, 2018), a Texas federal district court refused to dismiss a an Establishment Clause challenge to the practice by a Texas Justice of the Peace of opening each court session with a lengthy Christian prayer by a guest chaplain from his chaplaincy program. The court concluded that two of the three plaintiffs had standing, and that they had stated a plausible claim that the judge's prayer practice violates the Lemon test.  the judge had campaigned on a platform of reinstituting religious values within the office.  Both Freedom From Religion Foundation and First Liberty issued press releases announcing the decision. First Liberty also has links to some of the pleadings in the case.  (See prior related posting.)

Cert. Petition Filed In Suit Over Police Investigation Interference With Prayer

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court last week in Sause v. Bauer, (cert. filed 11/17/2017).  In the case, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed on qualified immunity grounds a suit for damages alleging that police who were investigating a noise complaint violated plaintiff's 1st Amendment rights when an officer who had come to her home ordered her to get up and stop praying. (See prior posting.)  First Liberty issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review.

Pastor's Suit Against VA Over Prayer Content Dismissed For Lack of Standing

In Youngblood v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156522 (MD FL, Sept. 25, 2017), a Florida federal district court dismissed for lack of standing a suit by a Baptist pastor who feared that VA officials would not allow him to offer prayers on VA property consistent with his religious beliefs.  At a memorial ceremony, Pastor Gene Youngblood offered an invocation specifically criticizing former secretary of State Hilary Clinton.  This led to a complaint that Youngblood had violated VA regulations that bar demonstrations or services on VA property that support or oppose current U.S. government policy. In dismissing Youngblood's suit seeking an injunction to prevent his future exclusion from VA property, the court said in part:

In short, the Complaint claims injury because Defendants will consider Pastor Youngblood's past noncompliance in determining whether to allow future ceremonies on VA property. While Pastor Youngblood claims the "threat of future exclusion of Plaintiff from VA property is both great and immediate" he fails to plead specific facts as to how that is so. Instead, Pastor Youngblood sets forth general and vague allegations regarding injury...

Texas Governor Declares Day of Prayer In Aftermath of Hurricane

In response to Hurricane Harvey and its aftermath, Texas Governor Greg Abbott yesterday issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring Sunday, Sept. 3 as a Day of Prayer in Texas.  The Proclamation reads in part:

I urge Texans of all faiths and religious traditions and backgrounds to offer prayers on that day for the safety of our first responders, public safety officers, and military personnel, healing of individuals, rebuilding of communities and the restoration of the entire region struck by this disaster.

Retaliation Suit By Dismissed Nursing Student Moves Ahead

In Brown v. William Rainey Harper College, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121333 (ND IL, Aug. 1, 2017), an Illinois federal district court allowed a student who was dismissed from the Practical Nursing Certificate Program at William Rainey Harper College to move ahead with her complaint that the action taken against her resulted from her practice of praying with her patients, as well as because of her complaints to the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.

Bahamas Constitution Protects Muslim Military Officer From Mandatory Christian Prayer

In Commodore Royal Bahamas Defence Force v Laramore, (Privy Council, May 8, 2017), the UK Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (a court of final appeal from Bahamas courts) held it unconstitutional under the Bahamian constitution to require a Muslim member of the Royal Bahamian Defence Force to participate in Christian prayers. At issue are the "ceremonial prayers" in regular weekly colours parades.  From 1993 to 2006, non-Christians could fall out during the prayers. A 2006 Memorandum ended that accommodation. Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

Oklahoma Governor Declares Today "Oilfield Prayer Day"

On Oct. 10, Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring today "Oilfield Prayer Day." The Proclamation invites "people of all faiths to thank God for the blessings created by the oil and natural gas industry and to seek His wisdom and ask for protection." Americans United wrote the Governor asking her to withdraw the Proclamation. (Full text of letter).

Defense Counsel's Prayers on Facebook Pose Concerns

Prayers posted on Facebook by an Ellis County, Texas defense attorney have come under scrutiny of trial judges after complaints by the county district attorney's office that running commentary on ongoing trials is included in his prayers.  As reported Tuesday by CBS DFW, prosecutors are concerned that jurors might come upon the posts during the trial  So far judges have not totally barred attorney Mark Griffith from posting prayers online, but they have ordered that the prayers not contain a running account of the trial. Griffith says he will appeal.

No Police Liability For Telling Woman To Stop Praying During Investigation

In Sause v. Louisburg Police Department, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80243 (D KA, June 17, 2016), a Kansas federal district court dismissed on qualified immunity grounds plaintiff's claim that her free exercise rights were infringed when a police officer investigating a noise complaint told plaintiff to stop praying while the officers were in the middle of talking with her in her apartment about the complaint. According to the court:

While Officer Stevans's instruction to Plaintiff to stop praying may have offended her, it does not constitute a burden on her ability to exercise her religion. Plaintiff fails to provide any allegations that would suggest Officer Stevans's actions coerced her into conduct contrary to her religious beliefs, or that he otherwise prevented her from practicing her religion.