When it rejected a request to fly a Christian flag outside of its city hall, the US Supreme court found that Boston, Massachusetts broke the U.S. Constitution’s, First Amendment free speech law. When it informed Camp Constitution it would not fly its flag, the court used a consentaneous viewpoint specifying the city had actually broken the Constitution. Boston authorities informed the Christian groups that flying the flag to mark Constitution Day 2017 would be a federal government recommendation of a religious belief.
Harold Shurtleff, the leader of Camp Constitution and was once a part of the John Birch Society, took legal action against the city for discrimination. Two lower courts have bafflingly upheld the city of Boston’s decision.
The court’s opinion was composed by retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, who kept in mind the local government’s “lack of meaningful involvement in the selection of flags or the crafting of their messages.”
“We conclude that, on balance, Boston did not make the raising and flying of private groups’ flags a form of government speech,” the opinion for Shurtleff v City of Boston reads. “That means, in turn, that Boston’s refusal to let Shurtleff and Camp Constitution raise their flag based on its religious viewpoint ‘abridg’ their ‘freedom of speech.'”
Boston has actually authorized 284 successive applications for flags to be flown on among the three flagpoles beyond its City Hall which show the U.S., Massachusetts, and city flags.
Camp Constitution’s flag is a white banner with a red cross on a blue background in the upper right corner.
Throughout oral arguments, legal representatives for the complainants and defense discussed if flag flying was an act of federal government authority.
Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch all provide concurring viewpoints supporting Shurtleff’s discrimination claim.
“Government speech occurs if — but only if — a government purposefully expresses a message of its own,” Alito wrote.
Kavanaugh stated the city had actually misinterpreted the Establishment Clause.
“Under the Constitution, a government may not treat religious persons, religious organizations, or religious speech as second-class,” Kavanaugh wrote.
Prior to the court’s judgment, Boston’s local government stated they were thinking about modifying the guidelines relating to the flagpoles. Personal groups would no longer have the ability to apply to have their flags flown, per ABC News.
As a bonus: included in Breyer’s opinion was an assessment of the architectural design of the Boston City Hall. The justice composed the “brutalist design” of the 1960s structure was when considered the world’s Ugliest Building.
H/T Timcast
