Divided U.S. Court of Appeals for Seventh Circuit Overturns Ban on Sectarian Legislative Prayer on Standing Grounds
On Tuesday, a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned a ban on sectarian prayer in the state House of Representatives on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit, in Hindrichs v. Bosma.
The District Court judge had concluded prayers mentioning Jesus Christ or using terms such as savior amounted to state endorsement of a religion; the First Amendment Center reports that "of 53 opening prayers during the 2005 House session, 41 were given by clergy identified with Christian churches and at least 29 mentioned Jesus Christ."
Two appeals court judges concluded that taxpayer standing was insufficient for plaintiffs to challenge the "Minister of the Day Program" because, although there is an expenditure of funds, the plaintiffs cannot point to any specific appropriation by the legislation, as the court concluded was required by the fractured 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation.
Dissenting Judge Diane Wood argued that Flast v. Cohen applies in this case, concluding that the injury in fact is that taxes "are being 'extracted and spent in violation of specific constitutional protections against such abuses of legislative power.'"
The decision may be appealed to the full circuit, and the ACLU of Indiana offered to bring another suit "if approached by someone who 'regularly attends the sessions and is subjected to the unwanted prayers.''