Law & Courts

Key Takeaways From Praying-Coach Case While Supreme Court Deliberates

By Mark Walsh — April 27, 2022 5 min read
Coach Joseph Kennedy outside the Supreme Court after oral arguments in his case. Sending one more pic of the lawyers on the other side in a moment.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether prayers at the 50-yard line by former high school football coach Joseph A. Kennedy were protected by the free speech and free exercise of religion clauses of the First Amendment. At issue is whether the Bremerton, Wash., school district could regulate the coach’s religious expression because he was on the job or his prayers might appear to be endorsed by the district or coerce students to participate.

Education Week covered the April 25 arguments here, but there’s still plenty to unpack from more than an hour and a half of back and forth in the case of Kennedy v. Bremerton School District.

The justices seemed to agree that the facts are complicated

There is a long chronology of events, especially involving games in the fall of 2015 when Kennedy took a knee at the 50-yard line right after the game. There are factual disputes about exactly what occurred at some of these games, as well as over the Bremerton school district’s sometimes-shifting rationales for its attempts to rein in the coach’s prayers.

“One of my problems in this case was the parties seem to have different views of the facts,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer said during the argument. “This may be a case about facts and not really much about law.”

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said, “Forget about all of the complicated facts of this case,” then offered a series of simpler hypotheticals, including a coach who prays on the 50-yard line without inviting attention, a coach who waves a Ukrainian flag to protest the Russian invasion, or a coach who kneels to make a statement about climate change or racial unrest.

One side’s lawyer highlighted some key friend-of-the-court briefs

There are 36 friend-of-the-court briefs filed in support of Kennedy and 21 filed in support of the school district. (Almost all of those have multiple groups or individuals signing on to them.)

During the argument, Richard B. Katskee, the lawyer representing the Bremerton school district, mentioned three of the briefs supporting the district. One was filed by AASA, the Superintendents Association, and other administrator groups. That brief argues that Kennedy’s prayers were disruptive and that such expression by educators undermines the educational mission of schools.

Katskee also cited a brief filed by members of the Bremerton community offering their views on the coach’s activities and another filed by a former superintendent and a teacher in a New Jersey school district that had experienced a similar controversy involving a praying football coach in the mid-1980s.

Paul D. Clement, the lawyer representing Kennedy, did not cite any of the briefs supporting the coach during his argument time. He returned again and again to the complicated record to stress that Kennedy only sought to engage in a private prayer and was not responsible for the participation or reactions of others.

The issue of whether the person praying was seeking to be the ‘center of attention’

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh asked Katskee whether a coach could make a sign of the cross on the field. “If the coach is doing it while not making himself the center of attention at the center of the field, it’s perfectly fine,” Katskee replied.

Kavanaugh said, “I don’t know how we could write an opinion that would draw a line based on not making yourself the center of attention as the head coach of a game.”

Clement later agreed, pointing out that soccer and football stars such as Mohamed Salah and Tim Tebow engage in religious exercise right after they score, when they are the center of attention in a sports arena.

“It’s private, it’s permissible, and the government can’t stop it,” Clement said. (He didn’t mention that neither of those stars are employees of a public school district.)

Clement also argued that Kennedy is “actually not the center of attention, if you look at the videos, which are in the record, because there’s lots of other activity going on.”

Justices seem reluctant to overhaul a precedent on public employees’ on-the-job speech

That ruling was Garcetti v. Ceballos, and the school district relies on it heavily for its arguments that Kennedy was on duty when he conducted his prayers, and thus his religious expression could be regulated.

Some groups on either side of the case suggested in their briefs that the court may want to clarify Garcetti.

“The court should … limit unprotected speech under Garcetti to public-employee speech produced pursuant to an employee’s job duties,” says the brief of 27 states supporting Kennedy.

The American Federation of Teachers and National Education Association, in a brief supporting the school district make their dissatisfaction with Garcetti clear, calling it “unworkable and inadequate.”

“Educators are particularly vulnerable at this very moment,” the NEA/AFT brief says. “State legislatures and local school boards across the country are considering and enacting vaguely worded teaching restrictions that target discussions of race, racism, gender, and American history.”

But there did not seem to be much appetite among the justices to rework Garcetti.

Justice Elena Kagan said, “I think a lot of this Garcetti stuff is … just not getting to the heart of what we care about ... which is coercion on students and having students feel that they have to join religious activities that they do not wish to join.”

Some conservative justices are a bit obsessed with getting rid of the so-called ‘Lemon’ test


The 1971 case of Lemon v. Kurtzman struck down state salary supplements for teachers in religious schools and yielded a three-part test for courts to weigh government action regarding religion. The test asks whether the challenged program had a secular purpose, had the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion, or created an excessive entanglement with religion.

“One of the difficulties of this case is getting one’s hands around the district’s rationale [for taking action against Kennedy], and as I understood, it was based on kind of our Lemon endorsement test,” said Justice Neil M. Gorsuch.

The trouble with Gorsuch’s observation is that neither the lower courts in the Kennedy case or the school district actually cite Lemon much, or at all, directly.


But the test continues to be applied by lower courts, and Clement said it has proved to be “a stubborn fruit, and I don’t think just pushing a pencil through it has done the trick.” He went on to say that “school districts continue to make this mistake” in relying on the Lemon precedent to regulate speech, and said that overruling the precedent “would be very helpful.”

A version of this article appeared in the May 11, 2022 edition of Education Week as Key Takeaways From Praying-Coach Case While U.S. Supreme Court Deliberates

Events

Classroom Technology K-12 Essentials Forum Making Technology Work Better in Schools
Join experts for a look at the steps schools are taking (or should take) to improve the use of technology in schools.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Budget & Finance Webinar
The ABCs of ESSER: How to Make the Most of Relief Funds Before They Expire
Join a diverse group of K-12 experts to learn how to leverage federal funds before they expire and improve student learning environments.
Content provided by Johnson Controls
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Modernizing Principal Support: The Road to More Connected and Effective Leaders
When principals are better equipped to lead, support, and maintain high levels of teaching and learning, outcomes for students are improved.
Content provided by BetterLesson

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Conservatives’ Checklist: U.S. Supreme Court Education Decisions to Overrule
Here are five education issues that could be targets for reconsideration if Roe v. Wade falls.
3 min read
The Supreme Court in Washington, Dec. 3, 2021. The Supreme Court has turned away a plea from parents to block a new admissions policy at a prestigious high school in northern Virginia that a lower court had found discriminates against Asian American students.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Dec. 3, 2021.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Law & Courts Leaked Abortion Draft Has Supreme Court Education Cases in Political Cross-Hairs
Conservatives have taken aim at decisions on educating immigrants, race in admissions, and religion. Liberals have some cases in mind, too.
8 min read
supreme court SOC
Getty
Law & Courts 'Brown v. Board' Cited in Draft Supreme Court Opinion to Back Overturning Abortion Rights
The leaked opinion in a case still to be decided by the Supreme Court cites landmark decisions including Brown v. Board of Education.
7 min read
A crowd of people gather outside the Supreme Court, Monday night, May 2, 2022 in Washington. A draft opinion circulated among Supreme Court justices suggests that earlier this year a majority of them had thrown support behind overturning the 1973 case Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a report published Monday night in Politico. It's unclear if the draft represents the court's final word on the matter. The Associated Press could not immediately confirm the authenticity of the draft Politico posted, which if verified marks a shocking revelation of the high court's secretive deliberation process, particularly before a case is formally decided.
A crowd gathers outside the U.S. Supreme Court Monday night after the leak of a draft opinion suggesting the court intends to overturn the 1973 <i>Roe v. Wade</i> precedent that legalized abortion nationwide.
Alex Brandon/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Rules Against Some 'Emotional Distress' Claims. What It Means for Schools
The dissenters say the decision means students cannot recover damages for the emotional harms of race, sex, or disability bias.
5 min read
Image of the Supreme Court.
iStock/Getty