The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether prayers can be offered at government meetings -- a practice that's been common in Congress and throughout the states for more than two centuries.
Pictured: Participants raise their hands in praise during a National Day of Prayer event in Texas last year. (Photo: Eric Gay. AP)
The religious expression case, which comes to the court from the town of Greece, N.Y., focuses on the first 10 words of the First Amendment, ratified in 1791: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
That Establishment Clause was violated, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year, when the Greece Town Board repeatedly used Christian clergy to conduct prayers at the start of its public meetings. The decision created a rift with other appeals courts that have upheld prayer at public meetings, prompting the justices to step in.
Alliance Defending Freedom, an Arizona-based Christian non-profit group, appealed the case to the Supreme Court. It is supported in separate briefs by 49 mostly Republican members of Congress and 18 state attorneys general.
In a press release entitled "Prayer will be heard on high," the group noted the high court affirmed the practice of prayer before public meetings in the 1983 case Marsh v. Chambers, in which it cited an "unambiguous and unbroken history" of such prayers.
But recent legal attacks by individuals and groups claiming to be offended by such prayers have created significant confusion in the lower courts.
"A few people should not be able to extinguish the traditions of our nation merely because they heard something they didn't like," said Brett Harvey, a senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. "Because the authors of the Constitution invoked God's blessing on public proceedings, this tradition shouldn't suddenly be deemed unconstitutional."
Thomas Hungar of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, the attorney who filed the challenge, said, "The practice of legislative prayer is firmly embedded in the history and traditions of this nation. We hope the court will reaffirm the settled understanding that such prayers, offered without improper motive and in accordance with the conscience of the prayer-giver, are constitutional."
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington, D.C.-based watchdog group, is representing the two women who challenged the town's practice, Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens. The group said that two-thirds of the prayers delivered between 1999 and June 2010 contained references to Jesus Christ, Your Son, the Holy Spirit or Jesus.
SOURCE: Richard Wolf