Coach Joseph Kennedy was let go from his school district near Seattle in 2015 for holding a private prayer on the field after every football game.
The school said it was a clear conflict of "church and state."
The Supreme Court disagrees.
In the Monday verdict, the Court upheld Kennedy's right to worship God in the public square.
The vote was (of course) 6 to 3, with the liberal members dissenting.
Kennedy's school district said he would pray out loud after games so that other people could hear, and that athletes would join him – and that this public adoration of Creator God from an authority figure might make people feel like they need to agree or join in the prayer.
(I'm told, of course, this is totally different than mandated curriculum on personal pronouns and school-sponsored Pride events.)
Here's a few choice quotes from the decision:
- A rule that the only acceptable government role models for students are those who eschew any visible religious expression would undermine a long constitutional tradition in which learning how to tolerate diverse expressive activities has always been "part of learning how to live in a pluralistic society."
- There is no conflict between the constitutional commands of the First Amendment in this case. There is only the "mere shadow" of a conflict, a false choice premised on a misconstruction of the Establishment Clause.
- Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic. Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a personal religious observance, based on a mistaken view that it has a duty to suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his religious exercise and free speech claims
- [T]he parties' disagreement centers on one question: Did Mr. Kennedy offer his prayers in his capacity as a private citizen, or did they amount to government speech attributable to the District? When Mr. Kennedy uttered the three prayers that resulted in his suspension, he was not engaged in speech "ordinarily within the scope" of his duties as a coach. (Lane v. Franks, 573 U. S. 228, 240). He did not speak pursuant to government policy and was not seeking to convey a government-created message. He was not instructing players, discussing strategy, encouraging better on-field performance, or engaged in any other speech the District paid him to produce as a coach. Simply put: Mr. Kennedy's prayers did not "ow[e their] existence" to Mr. Kennedy's responsibilities as a public employee.
DUBS ON TOP OF DUBS, PEOPLE!
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
