Case law precedent murky on prayer before government meetings

2013-02-24T05:00:00Z Case law precedent murky on prayer before government meetingsAaron Orlowski Journal staff Rapid City Journal
February 24, 2013 5:00 am  • 

The legal case against prayer at government meetings isn't nearly as clear-cut as the Freedom From Religion Foundation would have Rapid City officials believe.

The national nonprofit with 18 members in Rapid City fights for separation of church and state and has twice asked the Rapid City Council to end its prayers before meetings. In urging an end to prayer, the group's attorney cited a wide range of case law that seems to indicate the city would have a tough time defending its prayers in court.

But a Journal review of pertinent cases shows that most of the citations made by the group come from nonbinding lower court decisions.

When considering a wider range of legal opinions, a different picture emerges than the strident separation of church and state the foundation uses to threaten communities to end public prayers. A look at U.S. Supreme Court precedents is much murkier on the matter and may not support the foundation's argument as much as their warning letters indicate, according to legal experts.

"When it comes to public expression of religion cases, the Court has not done a very good job," said Patrick Garry, a professor of law at the University of South Dakota. "I don't mean to be critical of the Court, because it's divided and society is divided."

The Rapid City Council is already gearing up to defend itself against possible litigation Freedom From Religion could launch. At the council's behest, the city attorney is drafting a policy formalizing the prayers but explicitly not limiting their content.

At the same time, Freedom From Religion is planning on initiating litigation over government prayer somewhere in the country in the next year. Whether it will choose Rapid City or some other city is unclear.

Equally opaque is whether Rapid City or Freedom From Religion would win such a lawsuit. In either case, the side that loses would likely have to pay the other side's legal fees, putting at stake possibly tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

At least three groups or individuals have already offered to fund Rapid City's legal expenses in the event of a lawsuit, though City Attorney Joel Landeen declined to name which groups had offered.

One such group that commonly funds that sort of legal battle is the Becket Fund, which is dedicated to the free expression of Christianity and other religions.

The Becket Fund and Freedom From Religion have frequently sparred in court, with one Becket Fund spokeswoman dubbing Freedom From Religion "bullies," a label some Rapid City residents might agree with. But a Becket Fund attorney took a slightly softer stance.

"I'd characterize them as very devoted to separation of church and state and trying to keep all references to religion out of government, regardless of whether or not their argument is constitutional," said Luke Goodrich, a Becket Fund attorney. He added, "We've defeated Freedom From Religion in several cases."

The most definitive case on government prayer was decided by the Supreme Court three decades ago, and it allowed government prayer.

In the case Marsh v. Chambers (1983), Nebraska State Sen. Ernie Chambers sued State Treasurer Frank Marsh and the state generally, claiming the invocations that opened the Nebraska Legislature were unconstitutional. The Presbyterian chaplain who gave the invocations had done so for more than 15 years and was paid a $319.75 monthly stipend, funded by taxpayers.

Though the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, the circuit that includes South Dakota, found the funding of legislative prayers unconstitutional, the Supreme Court said the prayers as well as the funding of a chaplain were acceptable. The argument was that legislative prayers had long been part of the state's, and the country's, "unique history."

Since then, the Supreme Court has not taken on another case of legislative prayer in a significant way. It has made rulings on other state-church intersections, such as displays of religion on public property and school prayer, but even those rulings have at times been unclear.

For instance, on the same day in 2005, the Supreme Court issued two seemingly contradicting rulings on whether displays of the Ten Commandments on government property are constitutional.

In Van Orden v. Perry, the court ruled a display of the Ten Commandments in front of the Texas state capitol was constitutional because the display had historical value. In McCreary County v. American Civil Liberty Union of Kentucky, the court ruled a display of the Ten Commandments in the McCreary County Courthouse in Kentucky was unconstitutional because it advanced Judeo-Christian religion to the detriment of other religions.

Decisions from the lower courts on government prayer have been equally contradictory. Some appeals courts rule one way, others rule another, and the Supreme Court has yet to settle the issue. Goodrich, the Becket Fund attorney, reckons the court will do so within five to 10 years.

"Sometimes the Supreme Court just likes to let issues percolate in the lower courts and allow the lower courts to consider lots of different factual scenarios," Goodrich said.

Freedom From Religion likes to cite some of the more recent lower court case law. The Marsh v. Chambers decision from 30 years ago needs to be interpreted in light of more recent decisions, said the group's attorney.

Relying on the 1989 case County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, which mentions the Marsh case, many federal appeals courts have reinterpreted Marsh to restrict the content of prayers.

"Some form of nonsectarian prayer is permissible, but sectarian prayers, especially repeated sectarian prayers, are unconstitutional," Freedom From Religion staff attorney Patrick Elliott said.

Most of the Rapid City pre-meeting prayers have a decidedly Christian tone; the Freedom from Religion Foundation in the past has backed off when communities hold only a moment of silence before government meetings.


Contact Aaron Orlowski at 484-7069 or

Copyright 2015 Rapid City Journal. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(8) Comments

  1. Ruth69
    Report Abuse
    Ruth69 - February 25, 2013 7:58 pm
    As a child, I was taught that God heard silent prayers the same as spoken ones. (Are there any atheists who would disagree?) Unless their god became weaker, it appears to me they are just trying to show off their religiosity, exactly as Matthe 6 says Jesus instructed not to do.

    Certainly any Christians, while practicing the Golden Rule, would not force their religion onto others.
  2. Jason
    Report Abuse
    Jason - February 24, 2013 8:38 pm
    I am a member of the FFRF and have been for about ten years. I have paid in dues and donations what amounts to just a few hundred dollars over that time. But after the disgusting remarks from our Mayor alienating people like me that don't share his particular religious beliefs I am going to double down for my freedom. I am already preparing a large donation because of this, and if we take this council that only represents Christians to court, I plan on helping sue with more donations. So the reporter may take a dim view of the case law. I am willing to put my own money behind it.
  3. Old Guy
    Report Abuse
    Old Guy - February 24, 2013 8:29 pm
    The "Sweat Lodge" is a voluntary act and is not a public assembly. Note this group has not asked for all religous services to be banned on public property. The involuntary participation as in having to sit through a prayer at a public meeting when you do not agree with the beliefs of the person delivering the prayer is the issue. Some have suggested that waiting outside until the prayer is over is acceptable. That to me is a violation of my religious freedom under the first amendment.

    At one point a poster pointed out in one of these discussions that the words "GOD", "Jesus" and "Christian" do not appear in the Constitution. There is however specific wording barring any religious test to be elected to or hold office.

    There is also no part of the Constitution that says the "majority rules" on anything other that elections to office.

    Can anyone define at what point where your right to freedom of religion becomes an infringement of my right to freedom of religion?
  4. trustno1
    Report Abuse
    trustno1 - February 24, 2013 7:12 pm
    Does anyone go to a church that has a city council meeting before services?
  5. Fast Eddie
    Report Abuse
    Fast Eddie - February 24, 2013 6:00 pm
    The city council members should just pray if they want to and if the FFR morons don't like it tell them to go to h_ _l. Why even give these creeps the time of day?
  6. JenIon
    Report Abuse
    JenIon - February 24, 2013 4:35 pm
    Is there a reason why the city council members cannot pray before they arrive at the Council Chamber?
  7. StopProgStop
    Report Abuse
    StopProgStop - February 24, 2013 2:53 pm
    Because the they don't decide Rapid City's business.
  8. snowflake
    Report Abuse
    snowflake - February 24, 2013 7:31 am
    If the Freedom from Religion group is so adamant, why don't they go after the sweat lodge at the Hot Springs VA?
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

activate-button-3 FULL ACCESS

Deals, Offers and Events



What do you think of the 80 mph speed limit increase that takes place on South Dakota interstates April 1?

View Results

Recent Blog Posts

Does anybody (ever) beat the 'Cats?

Does anybody (ever) beat the 'Cats?

I'm not a fan of Kentucky or John Calipari but I can give the Wildcats the respect they're due.

March 27, 2015 10:54 pm(0)

Warm but windy

Could see possible rain showers this evening. Saturday will be gusty with winds around 35 mph. There is also a chance for rain on Saturday eve…

March 27, 2015 2:46 pm(0)

Aberdeen blogger seeks to refer two measures

Cory Heidelberger, who now operates his Dakota Free Press political blog from Aberdeen, filed notice with Secretary of State Shantel Krebs tha…

March 27, 2015 1:36 pm(0)

New gas station and Arby's restaurant coming to Sturgis

New gas station and Arby's restaurant coming to Sturgis

Land is being cleared and plans made for a new Big D convenience store and gas station and an Arby's roast beef restaurant at 2800 Junction Av…

March 27, 2015 1:24 pm(0)




March 27, 2015 12:02 pm(0)