Key Takeaways

1. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District redefined the balance between the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, holding that public employees retain significant First Amendment rights, even while on duty, so long as their religious expression is not coercive.
2. The Supreme Court's decision emphasized that the government cannot suppress private religious speech merely because it occurs in a public setting, narrowing the interpretation of what counts as government endorsement of religion.
3. This landmark case signals a shift in Establishment Clause jurisprudence, with potential implications for religious expression in public schools and other public-sector workplaces nationwide.

Introduction

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that addresses the complex intersection of religious liberty, free speech, and the separation of church and state in public education. Decided on June 27, 2022, the case arose from the suspension and non-renewal of Joseph Kennedy, a high school football coach in Bremerton, Washington, after he engaged in post-game prayers on the field. The Court’s ruling, which favored Kennedy in a 6-3 decision, has had profound consequences for First Amendment jurisprudence, especially regarding the rights of public employees and the boundaries of religious expression in public schools.

This guide offers a comprehensive analysis of the case, including its factual background, legal arguments, Supreme Court opinions, and the broader implications for constitutional law and public education. Attorneys, educators, policymakers, and anyone interested in religious liberty and the First Amendment will find this resource valuable for understanding the nuances and significance of the decision.

For the official Supreme Court opinion, see Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. ___ (2022).

Case Background

The Facts

Joseph Kennedy was employed as a football coach at Bremerton High School, part of the Bremerton School District in Washington State. Beginning in 2008, Kennedy developed a personal practice of kneeling and offering a brief, quiet prayer at the 50-yard line immediately following each football game. Initially, his prayers were solitary, but over time, players and others occasionally joined him. Kennedy’s practice was not part of any official school activity, nor was it required or overtly promoted by the school district.

The Bremerton School District became aware of Kennedy’s post-game prayers in 2015. Concerned that the visible religious activity could be perceived as school endorsement of religion—potentially violating the Establishment Clause—the district instructed Kennedy to cease his on-field prayers while on duty. Kennedy, however, felt compelled by his faith to continue the practice, viewing it as a personal religious observance protected by the First Amendment.

After continued prayers and significant public attention, the district placed Kennedy on administrative leave and declined to renew his contract. Kennedy sued, alleging that the district’s actions violated his rights under the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment, as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Procedural History

Kennedy’s lawsuit was initially unsuccessful in the lower courts. Both the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the school district, finding that its actions were justified to avoid violating the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the constitutional questions at stake, focusing on whether the school district’s response to Kennedy’s religious expression was constitutionally permissible.

For a detailed procedural history, see Oyez’s case summary.

Legal Issues Presented

The Supreme Court in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District was faced with several interrelated constitutional questions:

• Did the school district’s actions violate Kennedy’s rights under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment?
• Did the school district’s actions violate Kennedy’s rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment?
• Did the school district’s concerns about violating the Establishment Clause justify its restrictions on Kennedy’s religious expression?
• What is the proper standard for evaluating claims involving religious expression by public employees?

These questions required the Court to examine the delicate balance between the protection of individual religious expression and the constitutional prohibition against government establishment of religion.

Supreme Court’s Decision

The Majority Opinion

Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Alito, Barrett, and Kavanaugh (with Justice Kavanaugh not joining Part III–B). The Court ruled in favor of Kennedy, holding that the school district’s actions violated both the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment.

Key Holdings

1. Private Religious Expression is Protected: The Court found that Kennedy’s prayer was a private religious observance, not an act of government speech or school-sponsored activity. As such, it was protected by the First Amendment.
2. No Coercion or Endorsement: The majority emphasized that there was no evidence that Kennedy’s prayers coerced students to participate or that the school district’s actions were necessary to avoid an Establishment Clause violation. The Court rejected the district’s argument that the mere appearance of a coach praying on the field constituted impermissible government endorsement of religion.
3. Abandonment of the Lemon Test: The decision criticized and effectively abandoned the “Lemon test” (from Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)), which had governed Establishment Clause cases for decades. Instead, the Court favored a historical understanding of the Establishment Clause, focusing on whether the government’s actions align with the nation’s traditions regarding religious liberty.

Notable Excerpts

Justice Gorsuch wrote:

“Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word