Prayer In Public Schools

In 1962, in an unprecedented ruling, the United States Supreme Court notified public school systems across the nation that organized student prayer was no longer lawful. This ruling by the court came as a result of a lawsuit filed by parents of students attending New York public schools who took offense to the daily and voluntary recitation of the words "Almighty God" in a school organized morning prayer. Following years of litigation, the court reached the conclusion that school organized prayer violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits government bodies from making laws which respect an establishment of religion. Since 1962, American public schools have struggled to embrace the true effect and extent of the high court's ruling. Litigation surfaced across the nation as public schools struggled to eliminate school-wide sponsored prayer while at the same time affording students and teachers recognized periods for voluntary religious devotion. Many of these attempts, however, were struck by the courts. In 1963, the Supreme Court found a school system's authorization for teachers and students to read excerpts from the Bible in lieu of school-wide organized prayer to violate the Establishment Clause. The Court clarified that a public school's involvement with student prayer may not be done in a manner which promotes devotional worship rather than academic study and critique.

In 1986, in Georgia, a student successfully petitioned the courts to enjoin the Douglas County School District from conducting or permitting religious invocations prior to any athletic event. The court reasoned that the district's pre-game invocations were unconstitutional because its purpose was to perpetuate religion. In 1992, the Supreme Court held that school officials could not invite clergy members to open graduation with an invocation prayer or close it with a benediction. Today, a noticeable effect of the courts' narrowing of permissible religious activity within public schools has been the emergence of newly drafted laws by individual states permitting school mandated "moments of silence." These moments of silence have had the practical effect of allowing school officials to retain their ability to reserve designated periods for students to engage in prayer while avoiding the Supreme Court's definition of "impermissible conduct."

In Georgia, a compilation of laws known as the "Moment of Quiet Reflection in Schools Act" authorizes public schools to conduct a brief period of quiet reflection for up to 60 seconds at the beginning of each school day. While the Moment of Quiet Reflection in Schools Act was challenged shortly following its enactment on grounds that it impermissibly encourages student religious activity, the court ultimately found that the Act was not unconstitutional on the basis that it does not have a primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion.

Similar to Georgia, other states which have enacted similar "Moment of Quiet Reflection" type laws since the Supreme Court's 1962 prohibition of school sponsored religion include: Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia. While these laws have faced much scrutiny locally, to date, the Supreme Court has yet to declare these Moment of Quiet Reflection type laws as unconstitutional.

Please be aware that the body of law surrounding public education and religion is highly comprehensive and constantly subject to amendment. For specific questions you may have concerning how these laws apply to activities involving your organization we encourage you to seek advice from FDW attorneys at 770-478-9950 or by email at cellison@fdw.com.

Disclaimer: This article is designed to provide general information only. The information presented here is not intended to constitute formal legal advice nor is the provision of the same meant to result in the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.