The case is Cambridge Christian School v. Florida High School Athletic Association.
The petition for appeal, which the court said Monday it will not hear, came from Cambridge and dates back to a 2015 state championship game.
The school asked the justices to hear its case after a federal appeals court sided with the athletic association, which has barred use of a stadium loudspeaker for a pre-game prayer over concerns doing so violated the Establishment Clause.
An ironic twist in the argument of state-sponsored religion is Cambridge and a second Christian school were facing off in the state game.
On behalf of Cambridge, First Liberty Institute had asked the Supreme Court to review the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.
First Liberty senior counsel Jeremy Dys tells AFN the 11th Circuit referred to the prayer as government speech.
To do that, he argues, "abandons the foundational promises of the First Amendment" that are meant to guarantee individual freedom.
Even though First Liberty is “very disappointed” the appeal will not be heard, Dys says the longtime legal fight didn’t go unnoticed in Florida. The state legislature has since updated state laws that now allow football teams to include a pre-game prayer prior to kickoff.
“My hope is that other states will recognize the importance that this law holds and will follow suit,” Dys adds.
The FHSAA claimed a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case, Santa Fe Independent School District v Doe, requires it to bar Cambridge's speech because the stadium is city-owned and the athletic association is part of government. The 11th Circuit agreed and determined the requested prayer was government speech.
First Liberty was hoping the more recent ruling, the 2022 decision that favored coach Joe Kennedy, would benefit the request for a review. In that 6-3 ruling, the justices said the U.S. Constitution neither mandates nor permits the government to suppress religious expression.
"For Cambridge Christian School, unfortunately, the decisions are going to stand,” Dys says. “The arguments that we raised, that we think were very important for the court to hear, will have to wait for another day.”
