(MintPress) – The Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) is suing a South Carolina school district on behalf of 18-year-old Matthew Nielson over a district policy that sanctions prayer at graduation ceremonies. On Wednesday, the prayer went on as planned at Irmo High School’s graduation ceremony after a vote was taken by the student body.
During the span of the school year, Nielson reported that a student vote was taken that would determine whether the prayer service would take place. The school’s policies noted that a majority of the graduating student body had to be in favor of it for the prayer to happen.
Nielson said he met with school principal Rob Weinkle and Superintendent Steve Hefner to question the constitutionality of benedictions and invocations at school events. The lawsuit claims the prayer violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The Establishment Clause prohibits the government or public entity from deeming a particular religious practice as a national religious practice and makes it illegal to give preference of one religion over the other. It is unclear whether different religious beliefs and practices were considered during the graduation ceremony. The Equal Protection Clause provides every citizen the right to be protected by written law indiscriminately.
“Some schools have attempted to circumvent the ban on prayer at graduations by putting the decision to include a prayer up to a vote by the student body; however, this is also unconstitutional,” the FFRF has said.
In a letter written to superintendent Hefner prior to the lawsuit being filed, the FFRF questioned the district’s policy in light of prior Supreme Court cases that have dealt with religion in schools and the aforementioned clauses.
“Given clear precedent prohibiting prayer at high school graduations – even when delivered by a student – it is puzzling why the district decided to subject this matter to a vote by the student body,” the letter read. “The Supreme Court has settled this matter – high school graduations must be secular to protect the freedom of conscience of all students.”
After the district rejected the FFRF’s call to action, the foundation filed suit and submitted a legal complaint that stated:
“The clear purpose of the policy is [to] promote religion; it hardly lacks a secular legislative purpose; and it cultivates, fosters and fertilizes a most excessive governmental entanglement with religion. The mere passage by the District of this policy evidences a purpose and perception of government establishment of religion. The policy’s text and the circumstances surrounding its enactment reveal that it has such a purpose. The District’s implementation of an electoral process that subjects the issue of prayer to a majoritarian vote has established a governmental mechanism that turns the school into a forum for religious debate and empowers the student body majority to subject students of minority views to constitutionally improper messages. The award of that power alone is constitutionally repugnant.”
In 2000, a similar case was brought to the Supreme Court with Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe. The case highlighted a practice of the district of allowing Christian prayers over the public address system at school football games by a student-elected chaplain.
The high court ruled against the district, saying it is unconstitutional for prayers to be delivered “on school property, at school-sponsored events, over the school’s public address system, by a speaker representing the student body, under the supervision of school faculty, and pursuant to a school policy that explicitly and implicitly encourages public prayer.”
Recently, 16-year-old Jessica Ahlquist was named the winner of the Humanist Pioneer award from the American Humanist Association after she successfully filed a lawsuit against her high school that resulted in the removal of a prayer banner from her school on the grounds of the Establishment Clause.
Ahlquist, who is vocal about her atheist viewpoints, told the Associated Press that the banner, which called for students to fulfill their academic potential in name of the “heavenly father,” did not belong in a public school.
“Every time that I saw it, it was a reminder that my school wasn’t doing the right thing and that my school didn’t necessarily support me and my views,” she said.