Florida city's request for the Supreme Court to dismiss an atheists' First Amendment lawsuit regarding a prayer vigil is denied.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant a Florida community's request to have a case filed against it by atheists who claim they were offended when the city hosted a prayer vigil in response to a local mass shooting dismissed.
In order to establish whether "psychic or emotional offence purportedly induced by sight of religious messages" was sufficient to provide the atheists standing to sue, the City of Ocala had sought the Supreme Court to rule. The atheists temporarily prevailed since the Supreme Court rejected the city's plea. Yet according to Justice Neil Gorsuch's explanation in a statement, Ocala should ultimately win in the lower courts that are now considering the matter.
The case involves two Members of the American Humanist Association include Art Rojas and Lucinda Hale. As police organised a prayer vigil with local religious leaders in reaction to a shooting in 2014 that injured several children, Hale and Rojas have accused Ocala of breaking the establishment clause of the First Amendment. According to court filings, uniformed police chaplains were reportedly singing and praying on stage. On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant a Florida community's request to have a case filed against it by atheists who claim they were offended when the city hosted a prayer vigil in response to a local mass shooting dismissed.
The City of Ocala had requested clarification from the Supreme Court regarding the sufficiency of "psychic or emotional injury allegedly produced by observance of religious teachings."to admit the atheists' claim that they lack the right to bring a lawsuit. The atheists temporarily prevailed since the Supreme Court rejected the city's plea. Yet according to Justice Neil Gorsuch's explanation in a statement, Ocala should ultimately win in the lower courts that are now considering the matter.
The lawsuit involves two American Humanist Association members named Art Rojas and Lucinda Hale. As police organised a prayer vigil with local religious leaders in reaction to a shooting in 2014 that injured several children, Hale and Rojas have accused Ocala of breaking the establishment clause of the First Amendment. According to court filings, uniformed police chaplains were reportedly singing and praying on stage. Gorsuch wrote in an appeal after the Supreme Court denied the request,Statement that the legal principle, known as the "Lemon test" for a Supreme Court decision from 1971, that the lower courts utilised to award the atheists standing is no longer valid.
The Lemon test requires judges to take into account whether a government action had a secular aim, if the government was involved in religion, and whether the action's major consequence advanced or hampered religion when determining whether it violated the establishment clause. The Lemon standard, which the District Court relied upon, has been rendered invalid by this Court's explanation in Kennedy, according to Gorsuch. Although he agreed with Ocala's claim that the atheists lacked the right to sue, he claimed that the Supreme Court did not need to become involved in the case because the 11th Circuit had already decided so.had already returned it to the district court, whose justices will be held to the Kennedy ruling.
"In the future, I anticipate lower courts to acknowledge that the Lemon test that gave rise to the outraged observer standing has no further legal support. If I'm wrong, the city is free to appeal the decision here after final judgement "Gorsuch penned. In a separate opinion, Judge Clarence Thomas argued that the Supreme Court ought to have taken the case. Having "severe reservations" about the atheists' notion of standing, he said the Supreme Court ought to have taken action right away.
"We should reconsider this apparent anomaly before it progressively erodes basic Article III constraints on the judicial power," he said.
Post a Comment