From : Susan Naidoff
     To : All
Subject : School prayer alert
Replies : -> #297
This article appeared in the New York Times on Fri. April 16, 1993:

ROBERTSON TRYING AGAIN TO PUT PRAYER IN SCHOOLS
by Michael deCourcy Hinds

At Blue Ridge High School in Farmer City, Illinois, 63 of the 66 members
of the Class of 1993 recently voted to say prayers during their
graduation ceremony next month. School officials in the tiny farming
community turned them down.

But Pat Robertson, the tv evangelist, is hoping to use Farmer City, 90
miles SE of Peoria, as a test case in his campaign for prayer in public
schools, an effort that has put the issue back on the agenda of school
officials around the country as they plan for spring graduation
ceremonies. No matter what they decide, many schools might be drawn into
an expensive legal battle. The advocates for prayer in schools, led by
Robertson, are threatening to sue boards that ban prayer at graduation
ceremonies. Robertson is seeking a showdown over an apparent
inconsistency in recent Federal court decisions on the issue.

Opposing them are civil libertarians led by the ACLU. "We're really
stuck in the middle," said Gwendolyn H. Gregory, deputy general counsel
of the National School Boards Assoc. In Washington. What are school
officals to do? Ms Gregory's organization, which represents nearly all
school districts, has advised members that the best way to avoid
expensive litigation would be to allocate a moment of silence "to
solemnize" the graduation ceremony. But Ms Gregory said school officials
must not suggest how people should use the time, as any reference to
prayer would be unconstitutional.

The legal tangle that gave Robertson his opening began last June, when
the US Supreme Court ruled, in Lee v. Weisman, that a public school
COULD NOT HAVE A MEMBER OF THE CLERGY OFFER A SCHOOL-APPROVED PRAYER AT
A GRADUATION. That the Court rules in a 5-to-4 decision, amounted to an
unconstitutional endorsement of religion by the state. As part of that
decision, the High Court vacated an appellate court ruling in a Texas
case, Jones v. Clear Creek, that had permitted "non-sectarian,
non-proselytizing" prayers INITIATED BY STUDENTS AND LED BY STUDENTS.
The Court sent that case back to the appellate court for
reconsideration. But the lower court, The US Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, stood by its ruling. The panel of three
judges ruled unanimously last Nov. that STUDENT-LED PRAYER, UNLIKE
CLERGY-LED PRAYER THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAD BANNED, WAS CONSTITUTIONAL.
The decision has been appealed again to the Supreme Court.

Several constitutional scholars said in interviews that despite the
recent rulings, the Supreme Court has consistently forbidden public
schools to authorize any kind of prayer. That prohibition, they said,
would also prevent a school district from authorizing students to
initiate a prayer at graduation ceremonies. "The Supreme Court has taken
the view for 30 years that you cannot turn any part of the activity of
the school into a forum for prayer," said Stephen L. Carter, professor
of law at Yale Law School and an expert on the separation of church and
state.

Many religious organizations support keeping prayer out of public
schools, and they are baffled by the Fifth Circuit decision permitting
student-led prayer, said Douglas Laycock, a professor of law at the
Univ. of Texas Law School and a specialist in constitutional law and
religious liberty. In Lee v. Weisman, Prof. Laycock filed a brief with
the Supreme Court opposing clergy-led prayer in schools on behalf of 6
major religious organizations, including the American Jewish Congress,
the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs and the National Council
of Churches. "It looks like the Fifth Circuit is thumbing its nose at
the Supreme Court," he said. It may be a bad decision, but it's a
decision, and if I were Pat Robertson, I would run with it, too."  The
Fifth Circuist's ruling has the force only in Texas, Mississippi and
Louisiana. Elsewhere, Federal courts have the discretion to follow it or
not.

Robertson, whose organization is based in Virginia Beach, Va., has
promised to "INSURE THAT THE RIGHTS OF STUDENTS ARE PROTECTED AGAINST
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS OR THE MISGUIDED ZEALOTRY OF THE ACLU." The ACLU
maintains that any school-approved prayer would be unconstitutional. "Mr
Robertson is blinded by the results he wants," said Robert S. Peck, the
organization's legislative counsel in Washington. In a mass mailing in
Feb. and March, Robertson's legal organization, The American Center for
Law and Justice, distributed more than 300,000 copies of a 3-page
bulletin detailing the Fifth Circuit's decision regarding school prayer.
Jay A. Sekulow, the center's chief counsel, said that among the
recipients were the nation's 15,000 school districts. The center, which
has 13 staff lawyers and 75 affiliated lawyers around the country, said
on April 05 that it would send legal "SWAT teams" to communities around
the country to inform officials that STUDENT-LED PRAYER IS A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. Mr Peck of the ACLU said that students could pray
in graduation ceremonies only if SCHOOL OFFICIALS HAD NOT BEEN CONSULTED
BEFOREHAND. Students could pray silently, or a class valedictorian might
include a prayer in his or her speech as long as the speech had not
been approved by school officials. Or school officials might designate
some portion of the graduation ceremony as a public forum to exercise
free speech.

In Farmer City, where Robertson's group is hoping for its first test
case, local religious leaders referred the students to Robertson law
center after school officials denied their request for student-led
prayer. The center then dispatched 2 lawyers to the community, which has
a population of 1,700, and they discussed the issue with school
officials and students. "From the materials they gave us, we gather we
have the right to pray," said Chad Vance, the 18-year-old class
treasurer. "They said they will support us in court if we decide to file
a lawsuit. We're seeing the eroding away of our national heritage."

Lelan G. Beckley, a soybean farmer who is president of the school board
said he was sympathetic with the students' concern. "It's not what I
believe in," he said, "it's the law that we have to govern ourselves
by." On Monday, the board plans to consider overruling the school
officials prayer decision. The ACLS has also been in touch with the
board through a letter. "It said if we have prayer, we'll be looking at
a lawsuit," Mr. Beckley said.
........................................................................

Whew....this seems to becoming a very messy situation, indeed. There
does not seem to be any definitive decision on this whole matter that
seems to stick for very long. When will the controversy end?