## Facts

- The Nebraska Legislature opened each legislative day with a prayer delivered by a chaplain selected by the Legislature’s Executive Board.
- The chaplain, a Presbyterian minister, had served since 1965 and was paid with public funds.
- A Nebraska legislator and taxpayer challenged the practice under the Establishment Clause.
- The federal district court upheld legislative prayer but enjoined payment of the chaplain from public funds.
- The Eighth Circuit held that the chaplaincy practice, including the prayers, violated the Establishment Clause and enjoined it.
- The Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether a state legislature’s practice of opening sessions with prayer delivered by a publicly paid chaplain violates the Establishment Clause as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
2. Whether payment of a legislative chaplain from public funds renders an otherwise permissible prayer practice unconstitutional.
3. Whether retention of a chaplain from a single denomination and prayers in a Judeo-Christian tradition constitute impermissible governmental endorsement or denominational preference.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit in a 6–3 decision.
- The Court held that Nebraska’s legislative chaplaincy and opening-prayer practice did not violate the Establishment Clause.
- The Court relied on the history and tradition of legislative prayer rather than applying the Lemon test.
- The Court concluded that payment of the chaplain from public funds, selection of a single clergyman for an extended period, and the Judeo-Christian character of the prayers did not invalidate the practice given its historical pedigree and non-proselytizing function.
- Dissents argued the practice amounted to state-sponsored religious exercise and would fail under standard Establishment Clause doctrine.

## Legal Principles

- Legislative prayer may be constitutional when it is supported by long-standing national practice contemporaneous with the framing and early implementation of the First Amendment.
- Historical acceptance of a practice by the First Congress, including appointment and payment of chaplains, is strong evidence that the Establishment Clause permits comparable legislative prayer practices.
- In this context, the Establishment Clause does not require states to be subject to stricter limitations than those reflected in early federal practice incorporated into the Nation’s traditions.
- Features such as public funding, continuity in chaplain selection, and prayers reflecting a common religious tradition are not necessarily unconstitutional where the practice functions to solemnize legislative proceedings and is not used to proselytize or disparage particular faiths.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Nebraska’s practice of opening legislative sessions with a prayer by a state-paid chaplain, treating legislative prayer as a historically accepted practice consistent with the Establishment Clause when used to solemnize public proceedings rather than to advance or denigrate religion.


Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983)