RICHARD A. SOKERKA
During a “kneel down” in a football game, a quarterback takes the snap from the center and takes a knee with the sole purpose of running out the remaining time on the clock to ensure a victory for his team.
However, for Joseph Kennedy, a former assistant football coach at Bremerton High School, near Seattle, “kneel down” had a very different meaning. After every game, he took a knee - with the sole purpose of privately praying to God to offer thanks to his Creator.
The coach said he made the commitment to thank God after each game, win or lose, from time he first started coaching. He made it a point to kneel by the sideline after the game by himself for quiet prayer. Eventually, many team members joined him in prayer.
Seeing more and more players joining their coach in going to a knee and praying rankled school officials who told Kennedy to stop the postgame prayers in order to keep in line with the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause prohibiting the government from favoring one religion over another.
However, the coach did not compromise his religious beliefs nor his First Amendment rights. And when his contract was not renewed and he lost his job for essentially praying, he sued the school for violating those First Amendment rights.
His case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. During oral arguments, several justices emphasized that private speech is still private, and protected by the First Amendment, even if it takes place on public grounds.
The justices also brought up a number of hypothetical situations that seemed to emphasize that they did not think Coach Kennedy’s actions on the field equaled government endorsement - such as coaches who make the Sign of the Cross before a game.
Richard Garnett, Notre Dame professor of law and director of the Notre Dame Program on Church, State and Society, said he was encouraged to see many justices skeptical of the school district’s argument that it had to censor Coach Kennedy’s private prayer in order to avoid any appearance that it had ‘endorsed’ his religious beliefs.”
In a statement, he said the case was not about “reimposing prayer in public-school classrooms. Instead, it is a case about protecting all individuals’ right to speak freely - and to pray - in the public square.”
An amicus brief filed by Notre Dame Law School’s Religious Liberty Initiative said the court should “remind lower courts and regulators that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is not an excuse for censorship.” The group also stated that the court should clarify its doctrines and discard the unworkable and unjustified ‘endorsement test.’”
Being able to pray in the public square is central to our religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court decision in this case, which is expected in June, is all about affirming those religious freedoms.