VMI Meal Prayer

[Richard1366]

According to the Washington Post:

= = =

An appellate court ruled yesterday that the Virginia Military Institute's 50-year tradition of praying before dinner is unconstitutional, saying that the "coercive atmosphere" surrounding the event violates the First Amendment rights of cadets.

= = =

Two cadets at VMI brought suit.
Looks like the good guys have won one, but there will probably be additional appeals, etc.

[Stephen Maturin]

That's Mellen v. Bunting (http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021215.P.pdf) out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The opinion includes a nice comprehensive discussion of Establishment Clause law as it pertains to public prayer and, at first blush, looks quite solid (with the exception of calling Nebraska "Nevada" a couple of times).

[Toto]

link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52356-2003Apr29.html)

AU Press Release (http://www.au.org/press/pr030429b.htm)

[StrictSeperationist]

Well, this is shocking, considering the source. The Fourth is easily the most conservative Circuit Court in the nation. Still, the issue here is so plainly framed by Lemon that it seems unecessary to resort to the coercion test articulated in Lee to hold the practice unconstitutional. I don't know whether or not the school plans to appeal, but if so, this might be a good oppurtunity for the Supreme Court to resolve the apparent discord among the Circuits by squarely holding state-sponsored prayer in public universities unconsitutional.

Edit: Anyone know why profile signatures don't work?

[Jewel]

It pleases me to see cases like this. Perhaps there is hope.



Originally posted by StrictSeperationist

Edit: Anyone know why profile signatures don't work?

Signatures are not enabled.

[GaryP]

Do you think this would be applicable to Commencement ceremonies at public universities?

I attended my son's ceremony last year at our local regional campus of Ohio U. A minister prayed for the Invocation.

After complaining, the campus' dean said that she and most of her faculty did not want a prayer and since I complained, it would not happen again.

I would think this ruling would give her some ammunition if she feels pressure for this year's ceremony.

[Psycho Economist]

Originally posted by GaryP
Do you think this would be applicable to Commencement ceremonies at public universities?

No. Part of the reason the dinner-blessing at VMI was struck down was that the atmosphere of the school is one of pervasive sense that nothing undertaken by an authority figure is optional. The state cannot, even indirectly, give the impression that one is being coerced to pray.

Other public universities typically allow for enough other freedom that one could express his freedom of religious conscience without fear of retribution.

[Stephen Maturin]

Today the Supreme Court refused to hear VMI's appeal. The Fourth Circuit's ruling that VMI's supper prayer violates the Establishment Clause thus remains intact.

Justice Scalia (joined by C.J. Rehnquist) dissented from the denial of certiorari. Justice Stevens (joined by Breyer and Ginsburg) wrote a response to Scalia's dissent. The opinions deal mostly with issues of jurisdiction and qualified immunity, but they also include discussions about whether the VMI decision created a conflict among the courts of appeals regarding the application of the Lee v. Weisman coercion test to prayer at public colleges.

Scalia Dissent (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-863scalia.pdf)

Stevens Response (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-863stevens.pdf)

[Bluenose]

Today the Supreme Court refused to hear VMI's appeal. The Fourth Circuit's ruling that VMI's supper prayer violates the Establishment Clause thus remains intact....

***issues of jurisdiction*** ....


The jurisdiction problem was simply that the cadets have graduated and the old Super retired, and they tried to plead in the new Super.

The seeming conflict with the 2 CCAs [upholding pub univ prayer in voluntary setting] is distinguishable on the key element of the military nature of VMI. The cadets were required to eat supper together and required to hear the prayer. It is nice to see the ACLU win in the 4th CCA.

[Toto]

From Stevens:

The second reason justifying a denial of certiorari is the absence of a direct conflict among the Circuits. The Courts of Appeals for the Sixth and Seventh Circuits have rejected constitutional challenges to state universities’ inclusion of a nondenominational prayer or religious invocation in their graduation ceremonies, reasoning that college-age students are not particularly “susceptible to pressure from their peers towards conformity,� Lee v. Weisman, 505 U. S. 577, 593 (1992). See Chaudhuri v. Tennessee, 130 F. 3d 232 (CA6 1997); Tanford v. Brand, 104 F. 3d 982 (CA7 1997). The Fourth Circuit endorsed that principle in theory, but found it unhelpful in this case because of the features of VMI that distinguish it from more traditional institutions of higher education—for example, its use of the "adversative" method and its emphasis on submission and conformity. 327 F. 3d, at 371–372. Given the unique features of VMI, we do not know how the Fourth Circuit would resolve a case involving prayer at a state university, or, indeed, how the Sixth or Seventh Circuits would analyze the supper prayer at issue in this case. Thus, while the importance of this case might have justified a decision to grant, it is not accurate to suggest that a conflict of authority would have mandated such a decision.