To what extent, if any, may the government allow prayers at the graduation ceremonies of public schools? The answer is simple, although difficult to apply in practice: if the government has any say or controlling function over the words being said, then prayer and evangelism may not be a part of those words. This is the underlying principle which ties together a number of important court cases dealing with school prayer during football games, graduation ceremonies, and other school events.
What authority, if any, does the government have when it comes religious rituals like prayers? Can a government write specific prayers for public school students to recite every day? That used to be the case in many places in America, but that was challenged and ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled 7 to 1 that it was unconstitutional for a government agency like a school or government agents like public school employees to require students to recite prayers.
Do public school officials have the authority to pick a particular version or translation of the Christian Bible and have children read passages from that Bible every day? There was a time when such practices occurred in many school districts across the country but they were challenged alongside school prayers and ultimately the Supreme Court found the tradition to be unconstitutional. Schools cannot pick Bibles to be read or recommend that Bibles be read.
Can public schools endorse or encourage prayer if they do so in the context of endorsing and encouraging "silent meditation" as well? Some Christians thought this would be a good way to smuggle official prayers back into the school day, but courts rejected their arguments and the Supreme Court found the practice unconstitutional. According to the court, such laws have a religious rather than a secular purpose, though all the justices had different opinions as to why exactly the law was invalid.
How far can a school go when it comes to accommodating the religious beliefs of students and parents? Many schools have traditionally had someone offer prayers at important school events like graduations, but critics argue that such prayers violate the separation of church and state because they mean that the government is endorsing particular religious beliefs.
If government officials do not have the authority to write prayers for public school students or even to encourage and endorse prayers, can they allow the students themselves vote on whether or not to have one of their own recite prayers during school? Some Christians tried this method of getting official prayers into public schools and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it's constitutional for students to vote on having prayers during graduation ceremonies.
Religious invocations, including sectarian prayer, are popular components of high school graduation ceremonies across America. Many Christians expect their religion to be part of graduation ceremonies and don't care that not all students are Christians, much less that both Christian and non-Christian students and parents might object to religion being inserted into an official government function. Many courts agree with the dissenters and have ruled religious invocations as unconstitutional.
Are speeches given by students during graduation ceremonies fully private speech, protected by the First Amendment, or are they in some fashion also government-approved speeches, thus restricted by the same First Amendment? Students giving the speeches see themselves as engaging in wholly private speech, but this ignores the context of a state ceremony where government officials have final say over who says what and when. This makes graduation ceremonies state functions.
One tactic used by conservative Christians to introduce more official prayers into schools is to get students to vote on prayers. In communities where one sort of Christianity dominates, the outcome of voting can be predicted and defended as the "private" speech of students. Courts, though, have ruled that prayers done on under the auspices of government supervision, with government approval, and with government equipment, is effectively government speech and thus must be restricted.
