'Ave Maria' at graduation? Supreme Court declines case.
A superintendent banned an instrumental performance of ‘Ave Maria’ at a high school graduation ceremony because it seemed too religious. On Monday, the Supreme Court turned away the case.
(Page 2 of 2)
“It simply sought to provide an atmosphere in which all graduates could celebrate their academic achievements, free from controversial messages, and free from the controversy that plagued its past graduation ceremony,” he said.
Skip to next paragraphA year earlier, the senior choir had sung a piece with religious references during the graduation ceremony. “The selected song included Christian lyrics affirming ‘There must be a God somewhere’ because ‘Up upon my head I hear angels singing,’ ” Mr. Patterson wrote in his brief.
School superintendent Carol Whitehead received complaints afterward, and one person wrote a heated letter to the local newspaper denouncing the fact that religious references had been uttered during a school graduation ceremony. Ms. Whitehead was determined to prevent any repetition of the controversy.
When school officials learned that the wind ensemble wanted to play “Ave Maria,” they considered their options. Because it was an instrumental piece, with no lyrics, the only objection was printing the Latin words “Ave Maria” (Hail Mary) in the graduation program.
According to Patterson’s brief, school officials considered listing “the name of the piece in the program under a different title.” That option was rejected.
Instead, they ordered the students to play something without any obvious religious connection.
The action surprised the students in the wind ensemble. The group had performed the same piece in a school concert earlier that year.
Nurre performed an alternative musical selection, received her diploma, and then filed a lawsuit.
A federal judge dismissed Nurre’s suit. The ruling was upheld by a panel of the Ninth Circuit.
Two of the three panel members concluded that the superintendent did not violate Nurre’s First Amendment rights. A third concurred with the judgment because in his view the superintendent was protected from such lawsuits by qualified immunity.
The appeals court ruled that school officials acted reasonably by excluding the performance of “an obviously religious piece” at a public-school graduation ceremony attended by a captive audience.
In a dissent, Circuit Judge Milan Smith warned that the practical effect of the majority’s holding would be for “public school administrators to chill – or even kill – musical and artistic presentations by their students ... where those presentations contain any trace of religious inspiration, for fear of criticism by a member of the public.”
“The taking of such unnecessary measures by school administrators will only foster the increasingly sterile and hypersensitive way in which students may express themselves,” Judge Smith wrote. He added that it will “hasten the retrogression of our young into a nation of Philistines, who have little or no understanding of our civic and cultural heritage.”



Previous






Become part of the Monitor community
36K on Facebook | 12K on Twitter | 2,250 on YouTube