Constitutional Right to Pray
Dear RMPFC Chaplains,
I have the privilege to serve on the IACP Chaplains Section and provide direction for the overall chaplain movement across the United States.
I’m not sure if you are aware of the Lemon Test and the different implications this held for us chaplain folks. Recently, this legal determination has been changed by our Supreme Court and upheld in following cases. It is important for us to maintain current legal understandings of our boundaries. Please give this information a read.
Kevin Shive
Rocky Mountain Police & Fire Chaplains
Executive Director
—-
Dear chaplain brothers and sisters,
As I have done for the past 47 years of my law enforcement career, I continue to read US Supreme Court decisions, among others. Today (March 6, 2023) the US Supreme Court again proclaimed the absolute death of the infamous, multi-factor Lemon Test regarding the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. (The US Supreme Court created the Lemon Test in 1971. It abolished it totally in 2022.)
Today the US Supreme Court rejected an appeal in the case of City of Ocala, Florida v. Art Rojas. In 2014, when the Lemon Test was still arguably valid, a shooting spree in Ocala, Florida left several children injured. In response, the Ocala Police worked with community leaders to identify suspects and witnesses. Religious leaders suggested holding a prayer vigil in the town square. The police agreed. At the vigil, uniformed police chaplains appeared on stage alongside community religious leaders, all singing and praying for the injured children.
An atheist woman learned about the prayer vigil and decided to attend. She sued in Federal court because she had "direct contact" with prayer she found "offensive". It didn't matter that she went to the vigil knowing that she would be offended. There were two issues in this case: the woman's standing to bring the lawsuit and whether the police chaplaincy violated the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution.
In the Ocala decision today, Justice Gorsuch stated that "Really, most every governmental action probably offends somebody." Further, that by itself does not confer standing to bring a lawsuit against a local government and its police department. Justice Clarence Thomas stated: "Under Article III, federal courts are authorized 'to adjudge the legal rights of litigants in actual controversies,'' not hurt feelings. He further stated that "In every other area, we have been clear that 'offense alone is insufficient to convey standing'" citing to American Legion v. American Humanist Assn. (2019).
Even if the atheist complainant might have standing to bring the Federal lawsuit (which both Justices strongly deny), she can no longer depend on the Lemon Test to show an unacceptable entanglement between religion (the police chaplains) and the city of Ocala. That is because the US Supreme Court killed the Lemon Test in 2022 in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. Justice Gorsuch stated "In Kennedy, this Court put to rest any question about Lemon's vitality." He further stated "We held that claims alleging an establishment of religion must be measured against the Constitution's original and historical meaning, not the sensitivities of a hypothetical reasonable observer. And with the demise of Lemon's reasonable observer test, 'little excuse' now remains 'for the anomaly of offended observer standing'". Justice Thomas also stated that "Lemon is no longer good law . . . . ".
What's the bottom line? The Lemon Test is DEAD, DEAD, DEAD and no chaplain should make any reference to it except to say that it is DEAD. You may encounter attorneys who are unaware of this fact, or knowing it attempts to 'resurrect' Lemon. In that case, you should enlighten them. So if the Lemon Test is DEAD, what replaced it? The answer is simple and found in the US Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. ___ (2022) and as reiterated in City of Ocala v. Rojas: "We held that claims alleging an establishment of religion must be measured against the Constitution's original and historical meaning . . . ." There is no other test.
My statements above are solely my own opinion and should not be construed to represent those of any agency I am affiliated with. Don't be surprised if your agencies are unaware of today's US Supreme Court decision. They probably are also unaware that the Lemon Test had been abolished last year by the US Supreme Court.
I have attached the US Supreme Court decision from today in City of Ocala v. Rojas for your information. Dominus vobiscum. "Hey, let's be careful out there."
Rev. Mr. Dean Collins, KHS, MS