Law & Courts

Praying Coach v. District That Suspended Him: What’s Next in Fight Over Religious Expression

By Mark Walsh — July 20, 2021 4 min read
Bremerton High School assistant football coach Joe Kennedy, center in blue, kneels and prays after his team lost to Centralia in Bremerton, Wash., on Oct. 16, 2015. Kennedy, who was suspended for praying at midfield after games, has filed a discrimination complaint on Tuesday, Dec. 15, 2015 with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission according to The Liberty Institute, a Texas-based law firm representing the coach.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A full federal appeals court on Monday declined to reconsider a panel decision in favor of a Washington state school district in the long-running case of a high school football coach who was suspended for praying on the field. The court traded barbs in 94 pages worth of opinions that included one judge throwing lines of scripture towards the coach.

The case of coach Joseph A. Kennedy, who contends that he has First Amendment free-speech and free-exercise-of-religion rights to express his Christian faith while on the job, is now likely headed back to the U.S. Supreme Court, where in 2019 four conservative justices expressed sympathy for Kennedy’s case.

The latest development in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District is a vote by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, against rehearing Kennedy’s case. It appears that eight judges on the 29-member court voted to rehear the case, with several others expressing disagreement with a March decision by a three-judge panel against the coach.

“The Establishment Clause was designed to keep government out of personal religious exercise, not purge religion from the public square,” said a dissent by Judge Ryan D. Nelson. “There may be situations in which a school’s sponsorship or mandatory attendance policies lead to actual coercion. But merely allowing religion to be independently expressed in a school setting was never and is not an establishment of religion.”

Senior Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, who as semi-retired judge on the 9th Circuit could not vote on the rehearing, nevertheless issued an opinion that said the March panel ruling “obliterates [First Amendment] constitutional protections by announcing a new rule that any speech by a public school teacher or coach, while on the clock and in earshot of others, is subject to plenary control by the government.”

A praying coach causes controversy

Kennedy was the assistant varsity football coach and the head coach of the junior varsity team at Bremerton High School in Washington in the fall of 2015 when his post-game prayers caused controversy. Bremerton district officials advised Kennedy that he could continue to give inspirational talks, but could not lead or encourage student prayers.

The coach complied for several weeks, but sought an accommodation from the district to continue his post-game prayers. The school district rejected his argument that his job responsibilities ended when the football game did.

When the coach continued to pray at the end of two more games, the district placed him on administrative leave and he did not seek to renew his contract. The coach sued the school district, seeking reinstatement as a coach and a ruling that he had the right to pray on the field after games.

The coach lost in two lower courts before taking his case to the Supreme Court in 2019. The high court declined review, but four justices signed on to a statement that said they were troubled by the 9th Circuit panel’s original decision in the case.

The 9th Circuit’s “understanding of the free-speech rights of public school teachers is troubling and may justify review in the future,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote in a statement that was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

In March of this year, the 9th Circuit panel again ruled 3-0 for the Bremerton school district, holding that the district would have violated the First Amendment’s bar on government establishment of religion if it had allowed “Kennedy to pray at the conclusion of football games, in the center of the field, with students who felt pressured to join him.”

“Kennedy’s attempts to draw nationwide attention to his challenge to [Bremerton School District] compels the conclusion that he was not engaging in private prayer, but was instead engaging in public speech of an overtly religious nature while performing his job duties,” the appeals panel added.

Case is likely headed back to the Supreme Court

That ruling led Kennedy to seek review by a larger panel of the full 9th Circuit, which led to Monday’s opinions.

Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., who wrote the March panel opinion, issued his own statement Monday concurring in the denial of reconsideration. He criticized O’Scannlain for “succumbing” to a “deceitful narrative” of the case by Kennedy’s lawyers that the coach was being punished for silent, private prayers.

Kennedy “advertised in the area’s largest newspaper, and local and national TV stations, that he intended to defy [Bremerton School District’s] instructions not to publicly pray with his players while still on duty even though he said he might lose his job as a result,” Smith said.

Smith even criticized the coach for his public prayers by quoting the Bible.

“I personally find it more than a little ironic that Kennedy’s ‘everybody watch me pray’ staged public prayers (that spawned this multiyear litigation) so clearly flout the instructions found in the Sermon on the Mount on the appropriate way to pray,” wrote Smith, who in a footnote quoted from the Gospel according to Matthew.

O’Scannlain said that the panel, in its March ruling, failed to heed the “guidance” from the four Supreme Court justices in their 2019 statement and “doubled down” on its “troubling” view of the legal issues at stake.

“The panel now declares not only that the school district was permitted to suspend Kennedy, but also that it was constitutionally required to do so,” O’Scannlain said. “That is strange indeed, given that this is not an action brought by a student or parent who alleges the government coerced his or her participation in a state-sponsored prayer service. No matter, the opinion here weaponizes the Establishment Clause to defeat the Free Exercise claim of one man who prayed as a private citizen.”

The case is now likely headed back to a Supreme Court that has been very receptive to free-exercise-of-religion claims and that is familiar with Kennedy’s arguments.

Events

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
Artificial Intelligence Webinar
Managing AI in Schools: Practical Strategies for Districts
How should districts govern AI in schools? Learn practical strategies for policies, safety, transparency, as well as responsible adoption.
Content provided by Lightspeed Systems
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
Reading & Literacy Webinar
Unlocking Success for Struggling Adolescent Readers
The Science of Reading transformed K-3 literacy. Now it's time to extend that focus to students in grades 6 through 12.
Content provided by STARI
Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and K-12 education jubs at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.

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 Supreme Court Strikes Trump Tariffs in Case Brought by Educational Toy Companies
Two educational toy companies were among the leading challengers to the president's tariff policies
3 min read
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Members of the U.S. Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. On Feb. 20, 2026, the court ruled 6-3 to strike down President Donald Trump's broad tariff policies, ruling that they were not authorized by the federal statute that he cited for them.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Law & Courts California Sues Ed. Dept. in Clash Over Gender Disclosures to Parents
California challenges U.S. Department of Education findings on state policies over gender disclosure.
4 min read
California Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks to reporters as Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, left, and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, right, listen outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
California Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks to reporters outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, with Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield behind him. Bonta this week sued the U.S. Department of Education, asking a court to block the agency's finding that the state is violating FERPA by <ins data-user-label="Matt Stone" data-time="02/13/2026 4:22:45 PM" data-user-id="00000185-c5a3-d6ff-a38d-d7a32f6d0001" data-target-id="">not requiring schools to disclose</ins> students’ gender transitions <ins data-user-label="Matt Stone" data-time="02/13/2026 4:22:45 PM" data-user-id="00000185-c5a3-d6ff-a38d-d7a32f6d0001" data-target-id="">to</ins> parents.
Mark Schiefelbein/AP
Law & Courts Oklahoma Board Rejects Jewish Charter as Supreme Court Fight Looms
Oklahoma's charter school board rejected the Jewish school as members said their hands were tied.
4 min read
Ben Gamla Charter Schools founder and former U.S. Rep. Peter Deutsch, right, speaks with Brett Farley, executive director of the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, left, before a Jan. 12 meeting of the Statewide Charter School Board in Oklahoma City. Both are founding board members of an Oklahoma Jewish Charter School.
Ben Gamla Charter Schools founder and former U.S. Rep. Peter Deutsch, right, speaks with Brett Farley, executive director of the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, before a Jan. 12, 2026, meeting of the Statewide Charter School Board in Oklahoma City. The board rejected the proposed Jewish charter school on Feb. 9, 2026.
Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice
Law & Courts Religious Charter Schools Push New Cases Toward Supreme Court
Advocates seeking to establish publicly funded religious schools in three states.
9 min read
The U.S. Supreme Court is seen, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington.
The U.S. Supreme Court is seen on Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington. Religious charter advocates are betting a full Supreme Court will side with their efforts to establish religious charter schools.
Rahmat Gul/AP