|
Summarized by Kent Larsen
Mormon and Catholic Families' Football Prayer Challenge Heard
Philadelphia PA Inquirer 30Mar00 N1
By Ron Hutcheson: Inquirer Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments
yesterday in the divisive case brought by a Mormon and a Catholic
family challenging prayers before high school football games. The
questions by the Supreme Court Justices seemed to indicate that the
justices were split on the issue, but that the majority may strike
down the school's policy facilitating the prayers.
As expected, lawyers arguing for the Santa Fe Independent School
District, located near Galveston, Texas, argued that the prayers are
a form of free speech and should be protected by the U.S.
Constitution. But lawyers for the two families challenging the
school's policy say the policy imposes religion on students. "My
clients are Catholic and Mormon, and they're not against prayer,"
said ACLU attorney Doug Leacock who argued for the two anonymous
Texas families. "What they are against is having prayer imposed on
their children."
The school district's policy allows students to vote for a student to
represent them at the games, and allows that student to deliver an
invocation or other message solemnizing the game.
Of the justices, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice
Antonin Scalia seemed to sympathize with the school district, and
Justice Clarence Thomas, who was silent during the arguments
yesterday, is also expected to sympathize with the district. Justice
David H. Souter, who was the most vocal in criticizing the school
district's position, was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and
Stephen G. Breyer in criticizing the district. They are likely to be
joined by Justice John Paul Stevens. That leaves Justices Sandra Day
O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy as the likely deciding votes in the
case.
But even O'Connor and Kennedy seemed uncomfortable with the
district's position. Kennedy worried that the district policy
allowing the students to choose their representative would lead to
religious debates in school, as students campaigned for the privilege
of representing the school "That is the kind of thing, I think, that
our establishment clause wants to keep out of the schools." O'Connor
worried about how the policy might be extended to other areas of
school life, eventually resulting in student-led prayer in the
classroom, "If this mechanism is approved here, the same thing could
be done in every classroom, every day," she said. "We have to look at
the extended application of this concept."
But Justice Souter's questions expressed the most doubt of the
constitutionality of the school district's position. When the school
district's Washington lawyer Jay Sekulow, provided by a national
conservative organization, claimed that the district's policy was
neutral, that the student could express any kind of message, Souter
seemed to think the district was being ingenuous, noting that the
policy was set up to allow prayer, "We are not required to close our
eyes" to that history, he said. And Justice Breyer agreed, "This is a
mechanism in which the school district has figured out how to have a
prayer."
Justice Souter also worried that the prayers were still a mechanism
provided by the district, "We are still faced with a system in which
the school or the school district provides the forum," he said. "The
school district is forcing children to sit there and participate in
this prayer ceremony. . . . It is not merely religious subject
matter. It is religious worship." He later said, "The school district
is forcing school children to sit there for this prayer ceremony,"
adding that "is all we need to strike it down."
But Justices Rehnquist and Scalia disagreed. When Griffin,
representing the two families challenging the district's policies,
presented his arguments, Scalia asked, "Your clients' children don't
have to go to football games, Is anyone forced to be a cheerleader or
a band member or a football player?" But Griffin got the last laugh,
"When you're a teenager, yes," he said, provoking a ripple of
laughter in the courtroom. "That's spoken from experience."
See also:
Supreme Court Hears Arguments on School Prayer
News Max (UPI) 29Mar00 N1
Court sharply questions Texas school district's prayer policy
Sacramento CA Bee (Scripps McClatchy) 30Mar00 N1
By Herbert A. Sample: Nando Washington Bureau
Justices weigh high school pre-game prayers
San Jose CA Mercury News 30Mar00 N1
By Ron Hutcheson: Mercury News Washington Bureau
Supreme Court Debates Football Game Prayers
Yahoo! News (Reuters) 29Mar00 N1
By James Vicini
|
