Abstract
Legislative prayer has lent gravity and solemnity to American legislative proceedings since our country's birth. Although the Supreme Court determined that chaplain-led prayer prior to legislative sessions is within the bounds of the Establishment Clause, federal appellate circuits are split as to whether legislator-led prayer is similarly constitutional. This student-written Note analyzes the development of the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause doctrine in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Lee v. Weisman, Marsh v. Chambers, and Town of Greece v. Galloway, and the backdrop of American history and tradition that guides the Court's more modern jurisprudence. This Note further discusses the Sixth Circuit's Bormuth and the Fourth Circuit's Lund, showing that the Sixth Circuit is in line with the Court's precedent and the United States' long historical practices concerning legislative prayer. Finally, this Note argues that (1) Marsh and Town of Greece are the current governing authority for legislative prayer cases; (2) there is no practical distinction between chaplain-led and legislator-led prayer based on the message received by meeting attendees; and (3) the purposes of the Free Speech and Establishment Clauses, combined with the policies behind each, lend support to the constitutionality of legislator-led prayer.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
