Chino, California – The Chino Valley School Board has taken steps to challenge a long-standing legal injunction that prohibits invocations during board meetings, stemming from a decision made earlier this year. The district filed a lawsuit on July 31 against an injunction set by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2018, a move that has garnered attention from various stakeholders.
The Advocates for Faith and Freedom law firm represents the school board in this lawsuit. Joel Oster, the firm’s legal counsel, argues that a 2022 ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court has rendered the legal basis for the Ninth Circuit’s decision obsolete. “We have submitted a motion seeking to implement a policy that allows invocations at the beginning of school board meetings, aligning with long-held American traditions,” Oster stated.
This injunction originated from a lawsuit filed in 2014 by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), which targeted school board members James Na and Andrew Cruz. The lawsuit was initiated by a coalition of 22 parents, students, and district employees who expressed their discomfort with board members actively praying and encouraging the audience to embrace Christianity during meetings.
In 2016, the court ruled in favor of FFRF, prompting the school district to appeal several times. Eventually, a shift in the board’s composition led to the decision to halt the appeals process, avoiding a potentially significant confrontation before the Supreme Court.
Since then, the school board has enacted a policy banning proselytizing, emphasizing a neutral stance toward religion. Despite halting these activities, the financial toll of the litigation has been substantial. If the board had pursued the appeal, Calvary Chapel Chino Hills had pledged to fund the legal battle, but financial obligations escalated to $350,000 in legal fees after the decision was made not to continue.
Dan Barker, co-president of FFRF, criticized the new lawsuit as a misguided effort to overturn established legal precedent against government-sponsored religious expressions at public meetings. Barker contended that the board misinterprets the implications of the Supreme Court’s 2022 Kennedy v. Bremerton School District decision, which he claims does not invalidate prior legal rulings.
“This move appears intended to advance a form of Christian nationalism, presuming that the U.S. is a Christian nation that affords special privileges to specific believers,” Barker argued.
In response, School Board President Sonja Shaw stated that the board intends to welcome diverse voices and respect all faiths, rejecting any form of coercion or preferential treatment. She indicated that external pressures have driven the board away from a previously unifying tradition. “This is not what the First Amendment was designed to protect,” Shaw said. “We will not surrender our right to reflect the values of our community and uphold the freedoms foundational to our nation.”
The ongoing legal battle continues to evoke strong opinions, highlighting the tension between religious expression and the strict separation of church and state in public education settings.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.