WhatFinger


Lemon test

Liberty Counsel Defends Religious Liberty in Supreme Court Amicus Brief



Washington, DC—Today, Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the Town of Greece, in upstate New York, which was sued for opening its town meetings in prayer. In our brief, Liberty Counsel asks the Supreme Court to overturn the “Lemon” test and adopt a new test, which provides that if a religious observance comports with history and ubiquity, and does not objectively coerce participation in a religious exercise or activity, then it would be deemed a permissible acknowledgment of religion, not a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Support Canada Free Press


In Town of Greece v. Galloway, two people who occasionally attend city council meetings have gone to great lengths to make sure that public prayer is removed from these town meetings. Liberty Counsel’s brief addresses the question of what should be required before someone can go to court claiming that the government body is violating the Establishment Clause. Federal lawsuits require that the complainant have standing, which means they must demonstrate that they have been injured by an action or inaction. Over the years, the Supreme Court has loosened the standing requirement for Establishment Clause claims, allowing people with only a superficial contact with a government to bring a lawsuit. In Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Court ruled that in order to pass constitutional muster, the government action must be diluted with secular influences. Described as a “ghoul in a late-night horror movie” by Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, the “Lemon” test has wreaked havoc on religious liberty. “The so-called Lemon test allows mere offended observers to overturn years of government acknowledgement of religious tradition,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “Allowing Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens to bring their claim undermines the concept of standing and the freedom of religion.” “This Court should act to restore the constitutional meaning of Article III standing, by clarifying that the status of an ‘offended observer’ does not satisfy Article III requirements of a concrete and particularized injury in Establishment Clause challenges,” Liberty Counsel’s brief says. “The Court’s continuing reliance upon the Lemon test has meant that the Establishment Clause, designed to respect religious traditions without taking sides, has morphed into a weapon aimed at eliminating all vestiges of public religious expression,” Liberty Counsel told the Court.


View Comments

Liberty Counsel -- Bio and Archives

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.


Sponsored