E7. It is in a setting such as this that "[t]he board has chosen to permit" the elected student to rise and give the "statement or invocation.". The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, accordingly, affirmed. Rehnquist, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia and Thomas, JJ., joined. Even if the plain language of the October policy were facially neutral, "the Establishment Clause forbids a State to hide behind the application of formally neutral criteria and remain studiously oblivious to the effects of its actions." for Cert. Wallace, 515 U. S. 753, 777 (1995) (O'Connor, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment). The District Court did enter an order precluding enforcement of the first, open-ended policy. Our discussion in the previous sections, supra, at 307-310, demonstrates that in this case the District's direct involvement with school prayer exceeds constitutional limits.

Thank you, Lord, for our parents and may each one receive the special blessing. Hazelwood School Dist. See ante, at 306. While the plaintiffs remained anonymous in the proceedings, one of the children appears to have been an atheist who sought to have public prayer categorically disallowed. The Court also relies on our decision in Lee v. Weisman, 505 U. S. 577 (1992), to support its conclusion. Ante, at 22-23 (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U. S. 589, 602 (1988)).

Cf. If so chosen the class shall elect by secret ballot, from a list of student volunteers, students to deliver nonsectarian, nonproselytizing invocations and benedictions for the purpose of solemnizing their graduation ceremonies.' 7. election process. See App. submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections," West Virginia Bd. The constitutional command will not permit the District "to exact religious conformity from a student as the price" of joining her classmates at a varsity football game.22. Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U. S. 38 (1985), is distinguishable on these grounds. Ante, at 314 (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U. S. 589, 602 (1988)). Another is the implementation of a governmental electoral process that subjects the issue of prayer to a majoritarian vote. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court.

Ante, at 306; Cf. The Court of Appeals majority agreed with the Does. ANYONE TAKING ANY ACTION ON SCHOOL PROPERTY, DURING SCHOOL HOURS, OR WITH SCHOOL RESOURCES OR APPROVAL FOR PURPOSES OF ATTEMPTING TO ELICIT THE NAMES OR IDENTITIES OF THE PLAINTIFFS IN THIS CAUSE OF ACTION, BY OR ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS, WILL FACE THE HARSHEST POSSIBLE CONTEMPT SANCTIONS FROM THIS COURT, AND MAY ADDITIONALLY FACE CRIMINAL LIABILITY. Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select. And sporting events often begin with a solemn rendition of our national anthem, with its concluding verse "And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'" The policy involves both perceived and actual endorsement of religion, see Lee, 505 U. S., at 590, declaring that the student elections take place because the District "has chosen to permit" student-delivered invocations, that the invocation "shall" be conducted "by the high school student council" "[u]pon advice and direction of the high school principal," and that it must be consistent with the policy's goals, which include "solemniz[ing] the event." High school home football games are traditional gatherings of a school community; they bring together students and faculty as well as friends and family from years present and past to root for a common cause. N either the holding nor the tone of the opinion is faithful to the meaning of the Establishment Clause, when it is recalled that George Washington himself, at the request of the very Congress which passed the Bill of Rights, proclaimed a day of "public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God." Under the Court's view, the mere grant of power. See, e.g., Brief for Petitioner 44-48, citing Rosenberger, 515 U. S., 819 (limited public forum); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U. S. 263 (1981) (limited public forum); Capitol Square Review and Advisory Bd. Assn. It is beyond dispute that, at a minimum, the Constitution guarantees that government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way which 'establishes a [state] religion or religious faith, or tends to do SO.'" .

505 U. S., at 595. Wallace, 472 U. S., at 75 (O'CONNOR, J., concurring in judgment). Washington, 487 U. S., at 612 (internal quotation marks omitted). obvious observation that "adolescents are often susceptible to pressure from their peers towards conformity, and that the influence is strongest in matters of social convention." In Lee v. Weisman, 505 U. S. 577 (1992), we held that a prayer delivered by a rabbi at a middle school graduation ceremony violated that … Before home football games, students in the Santa Fe Independent School District could use the public address system to offer Christian prayers. 528 U. S. 1002 (1999). Nothing in the Establishment Clause prevents them from making this choice.4, The Court bases its conclusion that the true purpose of the policy is to endorse student prayer on its view of the school district's history of Establishment Clause violations and the context in which the policy was written, that is, as "the latest step in developing litigation brought as a challenge to institutional practices that unquestionably violated the Establishment Clause." While the suit was pending, petitioner school district (District) adopted a different policy, which authorizes two student elections, the first to determine whether "invocations" should be delivered at games, and the second to select the spokesperson to deliver them. Undoubtedly, the games are not important to some students, and they voluntarily choose not to attend.

Through its election scheme, the District has established a governmental electoral mechanism that turns the school into a forum for religious debate. See ante, at 14. App.32. "The principle that government may accommodate the free exercise of religion does not supersede the fundamental limitations imposed by the Establishment Clause. We refuse to turn a blind eye to the context in which this policy arose, and that context quells any doubt that this policy was implemented with the purpose of endorsing school prayer. In his.

34-35.

Recently, in Board of Regents of Univ. This can be more complex than the Court suggested in a relatively concise and straightforward majority opinion. Indeed, as the majority reluctantly admits, the Free Exercise Clause mandates such tolerance.

The District Court entered an order modifying that policy to permit only nonsectarian, nonproselytizing prayer. It further empowers the student body majority with the authority to subject students of minority views to constitutionally improper messages. This official policy was challenged by two mothers of students in the school district, one Mormon and one Catholic. 13 A conclusion that the District had created a public forum would help shed light on whether the resulting speech is public or private, but we also note that we have never held the mere creation of a public forum shields the government entity from scrutiny under the Establishment Clause. of Westside Community Schools (Dist.

The results of the elections described in the parties' stipulation 20 make it clear that the students understood that the central question before them was whether prayer should be a part of the pregame ceremony.21 We recognize the important role that public worship plays in many communities, as well as the sincere desire to include public prayer as a part of various occasions so as to mark those occasions' significance. Like the July policy, it contained two parts, an initial statement that omitted any requirement that the content of the invocation be "nonsectarian and nonproselytising," and a fallback provision that automatically added that limitation if the preferred policy should be enjoined. See, e. g., Bethel School Dist. In God's name we pray. Id., at 19. ", These invocations are authorized by a government policy and take place on government property at governmentsponsored school-related events.