On May 5, the Supreme Court affirmed that “legislative prayer” is permissible under the First Amendment. The decision is unlikely to change the rules for school districts.
The Township of Greece, located outside of Rochester, has since 1999 opened its monthly meetings with a roll call, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a prayer led by a local clergy member. Prior to that time, the meetings were opened with a moment of silence.
As it happens, the majority of the local houses of worship are of the Christian tradition. The selection of the clergy was done based on availability, and the clergy appeared as volunteers.
When citizens presented a concern that all of the prayers were Christian in nature, the Township invited clergy from the Jewish and Bahai faiths, and welcomed an offer from a Wiccan priestess to conduct the prayer.
Nonetheless, citizens sued for an injunction to require the “inclusive and ecumenical” prayers, claiming that the current practice favored the Christian faith in violation of the First Amendment.
The United States Supreme Court determined that the practice of opening legislative sessions, supported in its 1983 Marsh v. Chambers decision, applies equally to township bodies whose primary purpose is legislative in nature. Thus, so long as the township’s practice did not endorse any particular religion, it was compliant with constitutional requirements.
The Court noted that requiring the township to seek particular clergy or to require particular form or content of the prayer would create an excessive entanglement between the township and religious matters.
The decision has no direct bearing on whether school districts may run afoul of the First Amendment by opening board meetings with prayer, and does not effect the state or federal case law regarding prayer in school.
As discussed following the Third Circuit’s Indian River decision, the purpose of schools is not primarily legislative, but directed toward the education of children. Thus, opening exercises that include prayer or even a moment of silence must have a secular purpose and avoid having a primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion.
School Law Bullets are a publication of the KingSpry Education Law Practice Group. John E. Freund, III, is our editor. The article is meant to be informational and does not constitute legal advice.
