2nd Circuit Rules Town Should Encourage More Groups to Pray at Meetings
On May 17, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Galloway v. Town of Greece, 0-3635-cv) ruled that the town of Greece, New York violated the U.S. Constitution by opening meetings with prayers that favored Christianity over other religions.
Linda Galloway and Linda Stephens filed suit in 2008 claiming that the town’s prayer practice affiliated the town with the single creed of Christianity in violation of the Establishment Clause. The district court dismissed granted summary judgment against Galloway and Stephens. The 2nd Circuit overturned the summary judgment and remanded the case to the lower courts.
In this ruling, the Second Circuit did not preclude prayer, but noted that even though prayers may be offered with the best of intentions, those giving them may attempt to “convey their views of religious truth, and thereby run the risk of making others feel like outsiders.”
The court set what appears to be a new standard for determining whether a prayer, or pattern of prayers, is appropriate.
Justice Guido Calabresi wrote for the majority.
“What we do hold is that a legislative prayer practice that, however well-intentioned, conveys to a reasonable objective observer under the totality of the circumstances an official affiliation with a particular religion violates the clear command of the Establishment Clause. Where the overwhelming predominance of prayers offered are associated, often in an explicitly sectarian way, with a particular creed, and where the town takes no steps to avoid the identification, but rather conveys the impression that town officials themselves identify with the sectarian prayers and that residents in attendance are expected to participate in them, a reasonable objective observer would perceive such an affiliation.”
The court also was not impressed by the town’s claim that it would have accommodated volunteers from other faiths since the town “neither publicly solicited volunteers to deliver invocations nor informed members of the general public that volunteers would be considered or accepted, let alone welcomed, regardless of their religious beliefs or non-beliefs.”
The Galloway court referenced the Supreme Court case Marsh v. Chambers., 463 U.S. 783 (1983) where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Nebraska Legislature did not violate the establishment clause by opening its sessions with prayer as it was “simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country.”
The Alliance Defense Fund, which had argued for the Town of Greece, is currently deciding whether or not to appeal the decision either by petitioning the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari or asking the full circuit to rehear the case en banc. The appeal would be based on the idea that the town should not need to take additional steps, such as calling for volunteers, to insure compliance with the Constitution.
ANALYSIS
This decision appears to be a rare win-win where the town can continue to have prayers offered, but needs to be more proactive in making sure that the opportunity is made available to a wider range of faith groups.
Prayer is a way to reach for the Divine in reverence and should not be a launching point for an argument. After 2,000 years, there is still wisdom in these words:
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. Matthew 6:5-6 (NIV).
###
The European Attack on Religious Liberty
By Martin Surridge -
As the nation of Haiti continues to suffer through one of the worst natural disasters in recent years, and the chaos and desperation that followed the earthquake, an incredible amount of material and financial relief has flooded into the former French colony. While Haiti may seem like another world for many people, what many do not realize is that Haiti lies only 681 miles off the coast of Miami, and that many American cities have substantial populations of Haitian-Americans. In addition, the United States government estimated that several thousand Americans were likely killed in the earthquake. Haiti, it turns out, is not as far away as we had previously thought. Sadly, the fact of the matter is that concerned citizens and other individuals tend to pay a little closer to attention to a global problem when the effects can be keenly felt in their own homes.
While they have been easy to miss, the news has been peppered recently with stories of serious threats to religious liberty not in the developing world, war-torn regions in the Middle East, or third-world countries struck by natural disasters, but in Europe, our own geopolitical backyard. In the modern era, Europe has been a beacon for personal liberty and religious tolerance, with religion playing a seemingly minor role in most of the continent’s wars and conflicts. However, one does not need an advanced degree in history to know that Europe has also been a bastion of religious persecution, a trait that has reared its ugly head in recent weeks, mostly as the continent struggles to define itself against growing waves of Muslim immigrants.
Radical, or at least conservative, Islam was seen as the enemy in the legislative decision made in Switzerland recently, when the Alpine nation banned the construction of minarets on Muslim places of worship. Not only is Switzerland a famously tolerant nation, it is also a nation with a grand total of four such minarets. The campaign that advocated for the ban preyed on people’s fears of Islamic terrorism and resorted to despicable tactics, including a poster that featured minarets rising skyward like nuclear missiles.
Perhaps less surprising that the minaret ban in Switzerland, but just as concerning, was a recent incident on the Greek isle of Crete when the only synagogue on the island was attacked by arsonists twice last month, which destroyed thousands of books, two offices and part of the historic building’s roof. Anti-Semitism is hardly new in Greece, but neither is the peaceful coexistence of Jewish and Christian communities in a country where some Jewish congregations can trace back their roots hundreds of years.
Religious liberty is also under threat in France, where parliament is expected to enact a law that will require dozens of conservative Muslim women to cease wearing the controversial burqa, the face-covering full length veils. Arguments abound on both sides of the debate. Those opposed to the veil argue that it degrades women, is an affront to gender equality, insinuates that men are incapable of controlling their lust, and is a threat to public security. Those who contend that such a law would infringe upon freedom of speech and religion claim that it unfairly targets Islam and have pointed to the fact that conservative nuns expose little more than their hands and face in their own full length dresses with similar head scarves. Regardless of political affiliation or personal opinions on the burqa, it is hard to deny that if such a law were passed it would amount to government interference in religion.
If this pattern of religious liberty infringements were anything to go by, the United States may not be far behind. Connections between North America and Europe run deep and while there may be several key differences between the two continents, religious intolerance seems to be an emerging, unifying theme. These incidents display a disturbing trend that scholars of religion and sufferers of anti-Semitism have known for a long time: laws prohibiting the free practice of religion are just the first in a series of slippery steps toward widespread intolerance and institutionalized discrimination. It is time that the Europe, and the other nations of the west, show the developing world that religious liberty is not optional, but rather a fundamental and guaranteed principle of our society.