Students, punished for praying, sue college
May 9, 2009 by Taylor HanniganPosted in: From the Courts, Latest News & Views
The Scenario: Christian students were disciplined after one prayed with an instructor in a faculty office. Did the university go too far?
The students sued for free speech violations. The school had no right to stop their private, non-disruptive prayer, they said – even if they used a faculty office and an instructor joined them.
The college said allowing prayer in a faculty office, with instructor participation, crossed the line because it made it look like the school was endorsing religion.
What the court ruled: The court said a reasonable outside observer wouldn’t see things that way. It refused to dismiss the case.
Cite: Kyriacou v. Peralta Community College Dist.
Did the court get it right? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.
HigherEdMorning delivers the latest HigherEd news once a week to the inboxes of over 200,000 HigherEd professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to HigherEdMorning!
Tags: First Amendment, free speech, prayer, religion
Loading ...
June 17th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
How about the school was just allowing free speech? That is allowed.
June 17th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
How about admitting that the school was allowing free speech. That is allowed under the constitution.
June 18th, 2009 at 11:53 am
I’m sorry but I don’t understand. I work at a university in the UK. We have various religious societies – christian, muslim, jewish – who run prayer meeting, meditation groups, and so on – these include staff and students. As staff we have regular invites from the Chaplaincy (which covers a variety of faiths) to attend events in the spiritual centre we have on the campus. I have never heard anyone saying that this means that the university endorses religion – if you want to go, you go: if you don’t want to go, you don’t. I have no religious beliefs so I don’t go: some of my friends do. Seems simple to m
June 19th, 2009 at 11:10 am
This is a ludicrous interpretation of religious “freedom” and just another example of the incorrect interpretation of the First Amendment. The First Amendment guaranteed freedom of religion, along with other rights. Thomas Jefferson incorrectly re-interpreted it to mean a “separation of church and state”, which has caused untold problems. To use this to prevent an instructor to pray with a student in the privacy of his office is unconstitutional and another example of the extreme anti-religious bias of many of our leaders.
August 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
It’s one thing for students and faculty to attend an official religious activity on a campus.
It’s a different thing when faculty member and student are praying alone–in an office. Door open or closed?
If the door was open, who’s to say it wasn’t disruptive to others nearby?
If the door was closed, let me just say that it’s unwise for any faculty member to engage in anything not related to classroom instruction or research with a student alone in a faculty office. It just invites scrutiny and suspicion.
Too many people exploit their leadership role–in religious, corporate, government and educational institutions.
September 21st, 2009 at 7:06 pm
This is ridiculous and just another example of how screwed up some of our schools and courts are. What a waste of time and money. How about focusing on solutions to real problems?
October 28th, 2009 at 11:29 am
The way I read the scenario, the students are sueing the college and the court is allowing the suit to go ahead. The court got it right.
December 23rd, 2009 at 1:28 pm
I work at a major university and university officials have a blind side with religous clubs or organizations. They systematically discriminate against them thru actions such as the above, non support or indorsement, or even openly allowing inappropriate “dissent” in the form of “freedom of speech” against such organizations. However, they are against that same ‘freedom of speech” for the Christian clubs. Public universities are very narrow minded when it comes to this kind of thing.