I’m not saying he wasn’t praying in public. That part is irrelevant to the case at hand. He was disciplined for praying privately without students (by the District’s own admission), which the government cannot do.
…at the fifty yard line, in front of parents and students, which soon led to them joining him.
And he was told he could pray on the 50 yard line as much as he wanted as long as students were not around.
Yes, and if we can agree that this is what was at question, as opposed to the sermonizing and motivational speeches which he had agreed to stop doing, we can have a more fruitful discussion.
Do we agree that SCOTUS said he was praying in private when he actually wasn’t?
No we do not. The Opinion of the court never said he was praying IN private, but that his prayer was a private prayer, as opposed to the sermonizing or motivational speaking. We know that he knelt, we don’t know what he prayed about.
OK, do we agree that it’s not a private prayer when he’s doing it at the 50 yard line in front of students, parents, etc.
Is his private property still private property even if he’s waving it around on the 50-yard line in front of students and parents and et cetera?
I see you’re conflating two meanings of private here, so I’m not going to engage in such silliness.
No. I believe that one can do a private prayer in the public sphere, as differentiated from a prayer spoken out-loud.
I actually think @The_Other_Waldo_Pepper is on to something there, btw. I would agree that it comes closer to what I’m getting at than your arguments about private prayer.
The meaning of “private” in “private property” is different than in “private prayer” or “private reflection”.
Here, I can do the same thing. I can be naked in private, but not on the 50 yard line of a high school field in front of others.
Don’t be silly, the meaning of “private” is just what Gorsuch says it is - nothing more or less.
And I’d say that about what you’re doing: to me, the question is whether he’s praying as a public official engaging in government speech, or whether he’s praying as a private citizen — regardless of whether he’s doing so in public or, as it were, in private.
My whole point is that I’m not conflating the two.
What do you mean? Clearly, your privates are still your privates whether you’re on the fifty yard line of a football game or not.
Right, and the lower courts found that he was doing it as a public official. They found that his prayers on the 50 yard line right after the game, with students and parents around do not constitute private prayer as a matter of fact. The SCOTUS overruled them on the facts.
Let’s face it, this SCOTUS would overturn the prohibition on leading prayers in schools if they could get away with it. Anyone trying to argue their pretzel logic on what should have been an easy case is just carrying water for them. Back when it was normal conservatives on the court, the lower court decision would have held. It’s not even a close call.
Anyway, it’s done. It’s constitutional now for coaches to essentially lead prayers on school grounds after the game. Congrats! We’re one step closer to a theocracy.
I agree one can’t be “in private” on the 50 yard line of a high school field. But I don’t think being “in private” is the same as having a private prayer or private reflection.
That’s a matter of opinion, not of fact.
He was on the fifty yard line for a reason, not for shits and giggles. That reason was that it was his job to be there immediately after the game “communicating demonstratively”, but he chose not to do his job and to proselytize instead:
And neither is “private prayer” the same as “private property”.
“Fact” in the legal sense, as they determined it as fact, which SCOTUS is not supposed to mess with.