From 2005 to 2017, Boston approved all 284 applications it received before rebuffing Camp Constitution. flag and the State of Massachusetts - on the plaza in front of City Hall. The dispute arose over Boston's practice of allowing private groups to hold flag-raising events using one of three flagpoles - two are reserved for the U.S. 'Under the Constitution, a government may not treat religious persons, religious organizations, or religious speech as second-class,' wrote Kavanaugh. In their concurring opinion, conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch agreed with the outcome of the case, but not Breyer's reasoning.
#Free gay pride t shirts free
The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has taken an expansive view of religious rights and has been increasingly receptive to arguments that governments are acting with hostility toward religion.Īt issue was whether the flagpole became a public forum meriting free speech protections under the First Amendment to bar discrimination based on viewpoint, as the plaintiffs claimed, or whether it represented merely a conduit for government speech not warranting such protection, as Boston claimed. In turning down Camp Constitution, Boston had said that raising the cross flag could appear to violate another part of the First Amendment that bars governmental endorsement of a particular religion.Īs a result of the litigation, Boston last October halted the program to ensure that the city cannot be compelled to 'publicize messages antithetical to its own.'īoston has said that requiring it to open the flagpole to 'all comers' could force it to raise flags promoting division or intolerance, such as a swastika or a terrorist group. The city approved 284 applications in a row to fly flags before rejecting a flag with a Christian cross. President Joe Biden's administration backed Camp Constitution in the case.īoston's flag-raising program was aimed at promoting diversity and tolerance among the city's different communities. The decision overturned a lower court's ruling that the rejection of the flag did not violate their rights to freedom to speech under the U.S. Breyer added: 'The city's lack of meaningful involvement in the selection of flags or the crafting of their messages leads us to classify the flag raisings as private, not government, speech - though nothing prevents Boston from changing its policies going forward.'