Town of Greece v. Galloway
572 U.S. ____ (2014) (2014)
Rule of Law:
A legislative body's practice of opening its sessions with a sectarian prayer does not violate the Establishment Clause so long as it does not proselytize or denigrate other faiths and does not coerce non-adherents into participation. The practice is permissible if it aligns with the historical tradition of legislative prayer and the government maintains a policy of non-discrimination in the selection of prayer-givers.
Facts:
- In 1999, the Town of Greece, New York, began a practice of opening its monthly town board meetings with a prayer.
- The town invited local clergy, who were unpaid volunteers, to deliver the invocations, following an informal selection process based on local directories.
- From 1999 until 2007, every participating minister was Christian, and the prayers often contained distinctly Christian themes, such as references to Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Easter.
- The town did not review or provide any guidance on the content of the prayers before they were delivered.
- Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens were citizens who attended these public meetings to speak on local issues and objected to the Christian-centric nature of the prayers.
- After Galloway and Stephens complained, the town invited a Jewish layman, a Baha'i leader, and a Wiccan priestess, who had requested to give invocations.
- Prayer-givers typically stood at the front of the meeting room and addressed the public audience, sometimes asking attendees to stand or join in the prayer.
Procedural Posture:
- Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens sued the Town of Greece in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, alleging a violation of the Establishment Clause.
- The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Town of Greece, upholding the prayer practice.
- Galloway and Stephens, as appellants, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
- The Second Circuit reversed the District Court, holding that the totality of the circumstances showed that the town's practice unconstitutionally endorsed Christianity.
- The Town of Greece petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which was granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a town's practice of opening its legislative board meetings with predominantly sectarian prayers, offered by volunteer clergy from the local community, violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Kennedy
No. The town's prayer practice does not violate the Establishment Clause because it is consistent with the tradition of legislative prayer upheld in Marsh v. Chambers. The Court's analysis is guided by history, which shows that the Framers considered legislative prayer a benign acknowledgment of religion's role in society. Requiring prayers to be nonsectarian would improperly involve the government in censoring religious speech. The content of a prayer is not a concern for judges unless the prayer opportunity is exploited over time to proselytize, advance one faith, or disparage others. Furthermore, there was no impermissible coercion; offense felt by attendees does not equate to coercion, as adults in a legislative setting are presumed to be able to disregard or quietly dissent from a prayer without penalty. The prayers served a permissible ceremonial purpose to lend gravity to the occasion, not to establish a religion.
Dissenting - Justice Kagan
Yes. The Town of Greece's prayer practice violates the Establishment Clause's core principle of religious equality. Unlike the prayer in Marsh, which was for legislators in a non-participatory setting, Greece's prayers were directed at ordinary citizens attending town meetings to petition their government on specific matters. The exclusively and persistently sectarian Christian nature of the prayers, combined with the town's failure to make any effort to be inclusive of other faiths, aligned the local government with a single creed. This created a division among citizens based on religion and put non-adherents in the coercive position of either participating in a prayer contrary to their beliefs or visibly dissenting at the very moment they were to engage with their government.
Analysis:
This decision significantly extends the holding of Marsh v. Chambers, which permitted prayer in state legislatures, to the more intimate and participatory setting of local government meetings. It solidifies a historical approach to legislative prayer cases, rejecting the applicability of the 'endorsement test' and focusing instead on a lack of discrimination, proselytization, or coercion. The ruling provides local governments with considerable latitude to incorporate sectarian prayer into their proceedings, shifting the legal battleground from the content of the prayer to the government's selection process for prayer-givers and the presence of actual religious coercion against citizens.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"