Tension Between Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses Should Be Cherished
"The Roberts court is populated with judges who are religious and believe that religious principles, precepts and beliefs are paramount. It is altering the balance between the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause. The tension between them is one that should be cherished rather than skewed to favor one clause over the other for the perceived benefit of those who claim loudly their religious beliefs."
July 06, 2022 at 10:00 AM
9 minute read
Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a football coach on the Bremerton, Washington School District after he knelt at midfield after games to offer a personal prayer. Mr. Kennedy sued in federal court alleging that the district violated his First Amendment Free Speech and Free Exercise rights. After concluding discovery, the parties cross-moved for summary judgment. The District Court found for the school board and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court reversed. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. (2022). The majority opinion written by Justice Gorsuch for a six-member majority continued the court's march to alter the traditional balance between the Free Exercise and Establishment clauses in favor of the exercise of one's sincere religious beliefs.
The majority and the dissent differ widely on the facts here. At the conclusion of each game, Coach Kennedy went to the 50-yard line to bow his head in prayer. The majority describes these prayers as private and quiet. The dissent (authored by Justice Sotomayor) describes the prayers as demonstrative. The petitioner invited others to join his prayers and for years led student athletes in prayer at the same time and location. The dissent included a photo of the post-game prayer. It shows many student-athletes surrounding the coach praying. Coach Kennedy did not lose his job because of a single instance of praying at the 50-yard line. He did this regularly. He had been admonished many times to halt this practice as it violated school guidelines. He refused. Attempts to arrive at a compromise were unsuccessful.
Everyone knows what "private" prayers are. Everyone also knows or should recognize that praying on the 50-yard line at the end of a game is a "private" prayer in a "public" place.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All‘Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission’: Another Consequence of 'Hobby Lobby'?
8 minute readAI and Social Media Fakes: Are You Protecting Your Brand?
Neighboring States Have Either Passed or Proposed Climate Superfund Laws—Is Pennsylvania Next?
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250