On The Front Lines
Rutherford Institute Attorneys Ask U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Turner Case, Uphold Right of City Councilman to End Prayers 'in Jesus' Name'
WASHINGTON, DC -- Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Fredericksburg City Councilman Hashmel Turner, who was prohibited from ending his prayers at council meetings "in Jesus' name." In asking the Court to hear the case, Institute attorneys are challenging the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling that Turner's prayers constituted "government speech" and were not protected by the First Amendment.
Institute attorneys contend that the City's attempt to dictate the content of prayers and prohibit Turner from praying according to his conscience and religious beliefs violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as well as Turner's free speech and free exercise rights. Furthermore, Institute attorneys argued, "In the relatively short lifespan of the government speech doctrine, this Court has never deemed legislative prayer to constitute government speech and should not do so now." A copy of the Institute's petition is available here.
"It is my hope that the Supreme Court will hear this very important case," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "If the government can censor speech on the grounds that it is so-called 'government speech,' it will not be long before this label becomes a convenient tool for silencing any message that does not conform to what government officials deem appropriate."
Hashmel Turner has been a member of the Fredericksburg City Council since 2002. Since the 1950s, the City Council has allowed Council members, on a rotating basis, to open its meetings with prayer. Upon his election in 2002, Turner asked to be placed on the rotating schedule to pray. Turner specifically offered his prayers both for himself individually that he might have divine wisdom and guidance in carrying out his responsibilities and likewise for the deliberation of the City Council. Turner often ended his prayers "in the name of Jesus Christ" out of a sincere belief that he is required to do so by his faith.
After several prayers were offered by Turner in this rotating schedule, the ACLU threatened to sue the City Council for violating the Establishment Clause by allowing Turner to invoke the name of Jesus Christ in his prayers. Soon after, the City Council adopted a policy permitting only "nondenominational" prayers. Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute then filed suit against the City of Fredericksburg's City Council for its discriminatory policy.
In August 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed Turner's case on the basis that his prayers constituted "government speech." On appeal, Institute attorneys pointed out that "government cannot itself pray, thus prayer cannot be government speech." Moreover, because the individual Council members control the content of their prayers, the prayers do not constitute government speech. However, in a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel for the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit declared that the policy does not violate Turner's free speech and free exercise rights.
In asking the Supreme Court to hear the case, Institute attorneys urged: "Rather than permitting the dumbing down of legislative prayer to a civil religion that robs the nation of its diversity and the opportunity for religious tolerance and accommodation, this Court should grant review in this case to...acknowledge that the Establishment Clause does not require that legislative prayer extinguish the diversity of religious viewpoints in our country."
Press Contact
,
