Christian prayers at government meetings don't violate church-state barrier, court rules

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Christian-only prayers offered by elected community leaders at the beginning of government meetings in Rowan County, North Carolina, did not violate the separation of church and state.

In the 2-1 decision on Sept. 20, Judges G. Steven Agee and Dennis W. Shedd overturned a district court decision that considered the practice to be a violation of the constitution, Richmond Free Press reported. Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III disagreed with the two judges arguing that they were allowing a seat of government to begin "to resemble a house of worship."

The court decision involving Rowan County also affected the prayer practices in other states including Virginia, North and South Carolina, West Virginia and Maryland. It expanded on the 2014 Supreme Court ruling that upheld the practice of the town of Greece in New York, allowing clergy to open government meetings with prayers.

"Under the Supreme Court's most recent decision explaining legislative prayer, Town of Greece v. Galloway, we find the Board's legislative prayer practice constitutional," Agee wrote in the decision.

"There is a clear line of precedent not only upholding the practice of legislative prayer, but acknowledging the ways in which it can bring together citizens of all backgrounds and encourage them to participate in the workings of their government," he continued.

Agee pointed out that the long-standing practice of legislative prayer, including those that were led by lawmakers, has been accepted as a form of religious observance.

"We decline to accept the district court's view that legislative prayer forfeits its constitutionally protected status because a legislator delivers the invocation," he added.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a petition last week asking the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the decision.

The petition was filed on behalf of three Rowan County residents Nancy Lund, Robert Voelker and Liesa Montag-Siegel, who said they felt coerced to join the prayers.

The ACLU contended that the commissioners intended the audience to participate by directing them to stand up for the prayers and by starting with phrases similar to "let us pray" or "please pray with me."

The group argued that the decision would erode constitutional limitations on legislative prayers if it is allowed to stand.