Pennsylvania House's policy banning atheists from opening prayer does not violate Constitution, court says

close

Video

Opening prayers before government meetings sparking controversy

In the Pennsylvania State House a newly elected Muslim lawmaker said she was offended by a Christian's references to Jesus in a recent invocation. While this is something that's been a tradition of our country since the very beginning, is it better not to have prayer to open governmental meetings? Pastor Shane Idleman and Christopher Hale are here to discuss.

The Pennsylvania House's policy that bans atheists from providing an invocation at the start of legislative sessions does not violate the Constitution, a federal appeals court ruled.

On Friday, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower-court decision and ruled that opening prayers for legislative sessions are limited to guest chaplains who believe in God, or a divine or higher power.

100,000 ATTEND CALIFORNIA CRUSADE FOCUSED ON GOD AND COUNTRY

Judge Thomas L. Ambro ruled against petitions brought by the Freedom From Religion Foundation claiming such restriction violates portions of the Constitution, including free speech, the establishment and free exercise of religion and equal protection.

"The Supreme Court has long taken as given that prayer presumes invoking a higher power," Ambro, who was nominated by President Clinton, wrote in his opinion.

RAVI ZACHARIAS, CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR, ON THE 'TOUGHEST' QUESTION FOR FAITH TODAY

The policy banning atheists was defended by Pennsylvania House Speaker Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny.

Karl Myers, a Philadelphia-based lawyer who argued the case for Turzai, said: “The House’s practice of beginning its legislative sessions with prayer dates back to the earliest days of our commonwealth and our nation and the current House practice is simply a continuation of that historical tradition."

The 2-1 opinion noted that Congress “urged President Washington to proclaim ‘a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts, the many and signal favours of Almighty God.’”

Video

The court relied heavily on historical practice in reaching a decision, citing the Supreme Court's recent decision upholding the Peace Cross war memorial. It argued that, historically, legislatures prayers “seek ‘divine guidance’ in lawmaking” and “allow the legislature to ‘acknowledge the place religion holds in the lives of many private citizens.’”

One of the plaintiffs, Brian Fields, reacted on Twitter, calling it "very disappointing." Seven individuals and four organizations had sued after they sought to give the invocation and were rejected because they do not believe in God, their lawyer said.

FLORIDA GOV. RON DESANTIS ASKED FOR NO HURRICANES IN WESTERN WALL PRAYER

“The court has permitted the Pennsylvania House of Representatives to discriminate based on religion against people who do not believe in a god,” said Alex Luchenitser, a lawyer for the Washington-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State, who argued the case for the plaintiffs.

Luchenitser said he had not discussed whether to appeal with his clients.

Earlier this year, State Rep. Stephanie Borowicz, a Republican and associate pastor’s wife, was accused of bigotry after she invoked the name of Jesus at least 13 times just before the legislature swore in its first Muslim woman at the statehouse in Harrisburg.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Of the 265 Pennsylvania House guest chaplains between 2008 and 2016, 238 were Christian, 23 were Jewish, three were Muslim and one was defined only as “monotheistic.”

If there is a silver lining, Luchenitser said, it is that the court's decision is limited to legislative prayer and prohibits the Pennsylvania House from discriminating based on religion among people who believe in God.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.