## Facts

- The Town of Greece, New York, began opening monthly town board meetings in 1999 with a roll call, the Pledge of Allegiance, and an invocation by an invited local clergy member.
- The town had no written policy governing selection of prayer-givers or prayer content; in practice, most invited speakers were Christian clergy reflecting local congregations.
- From 1999 to 2007, every invocation was delivered by a Christian minister; after complaints, the town also invited a Jewish layman, a Wiccan priestess, and a Baha’i adherent.
- Many invocations contained explicitly Christian references (e.g., to Jesus, God, or the Holy Spirit), alongside general requests for guidance, cooperation, and wisdom.
- Residents Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens attended meetings and alleged the practice preferred Christianity, aligned the town with a particular faith, and made them feel excluded.
- The challengers argued that, at minimum, invocations should be inclusive and ecumenical and refer only to a generic deity.
- The district court entered summary judgment for the town; the court of appeals reversed, concluding the practice, considered in context, conveyed endorsement of Christianity.

## Issues

1. Whether opening local legislative meetings with prayer that is often sectarian violates the Establishment Clause when the town does not intentionally discriminate in selecting prayer-givers.
2. Whether the Establishment Clause requires invocations to be nonsectarian or “inclusive” in content.
3. Whether the practice is unconstitutional because it coerces participation by nonadherents or effectively aligns the government with a faith.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and upheld the town’s practice in a 5–4 decision.
- The Court held that legislative prayer consistent with historical tradition is permissible and that sectarian references do not, by themselves, render a practice unconstitutional.
- The Court rejected a rule requiring nonsectarian prayers because it would place government and courts in the role of regulating religious expression.
- The Court found no unconstitutional coercion where attendees could decline to participate without penalty and there was no indication official decisions turned on participation.
- The Court indicated constitutional limits would be implicated by a pattern of prayers that denigrate, proselytize, or reflect an impermissible government purpose, or by a discriminatory policy excluding minority faiths.

## Legal Principles

- Legislative prayer is compatible with the Establishment Clause when it fits within a long national tradition of opening legislative sessions with invocation.
- Government need not require prayers to be nonsectarian; imposing content requirements risks governmental control over religious speech.
- The constitutionality of a legislative-prayer practice turns on factors including nondiscriminatory access for would-be prayer-givers, absence of coercion, and absence of a sustained pattern of denigration or proselytizing.
- Offense, discomfort, or perceived exclusion, without coercion or discriminatory exclusion, is insufficient to establish an Establishment Clause violation in this context.
- A local government is not required to seek religious “balance” by recruiting speakers beyond its community if it maintains a nondiscriminatory selection approach.

## Conclusion

The Court held that a town may open its legislative meetings with prayer that includes sectarian references without violating the Establishment Clause, so long as the practice reflects historical legislative-prayer tradition, does not discriminate against minority faiths in selecting prayer-givers, and does not coerce public participation.


Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. 565 (2014)