The Boston City Council recently faced a legal challenge from the Satanic Temple regarding the invitation process for delivering invocations before meetings. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled that the council’s decision not to invite the Satanic Temple did not violate the First Amendment.
Typically, the council members choose speakers for invocations based on personal relationships or community work, with most speakers being Christian clergy members. The Satanic Temple’s chapter in Salem, Massachusetts, sought an invitation to deliver an invocation in 2016 but was not invited. The group then sued the city council.
The Satanic Temple claims to venerate but not worship Satan and engages in charitable acts, such as winter coat drives for low-income individuals. However, the court ruled that the council’s selection process for invocation speakers did not violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
The court also stated that there was no evidence that the council members chose speakers based on religious biases or preferences. Additionally, the Satanic Temple failed to demonstrate that not being invited to deliver an invocation created a substantial burden on its religious beliefs.
While the court ruled in favor of the Boston City Council in this case, it issued a cautionary note for the future. It warned that if council members were to show favoritism towards speakers representing religious majorities or were to disparage minority groups during invocations, it could potentially violate the establishment clause.
This case highlights the balance between religious freedom and government practices when it comes to public invocations. It also serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding constitutional commands under the First Amendment’s establishment clause. The ruling sets a precedent for how future invocation speaker selections should be conducted to avoid potential constitutional violations.
