ACLJ Case Summary

The ACLJ has served as Counsel of Record in numerous Supreme Court cases, many of which have resulted in landmark decisions by the Court in First Amendment and religious liberty law. The firm’s involvement at the Supreme Court ranges from filing amicus briefs with the Court to providing legal counsel and support to like-minded organizations who find themselves and their cases before the Court to arguing the cases, as Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow has done 9 times.

The following is a list of the cases considered by the United States Supreme Court:

Free Speech

Much of the legal work at the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law – particularly the First Amendment.

Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow has been committed to protecting free speech – even before the formation of the ACLJ. In Board of Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus (1987), which predated the formation of the ACLJ, the Supreme Court considered a critical free speech case that centered on the distribution of religious materials at the Los Angeles airport and ruled that a ban on the distribution of religious materials at the airport was unconstitutional.

• Board of Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus (1987)

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a ban on free speech activity that prevented the distribution of religious materials inside the terminal of the Los Angeles airport. The court said the ban could not be justified “because no conceivable governmental interest would justify such an absolute prohibition of speech.” The case is often cited as legal precedent in other First Amendment and public evangelism cases. Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

• United States v. Kokinda (1990)

The Supreme Court cleared the way for the protection of additional free speech activity in public areas when it strengthened the constitutionality of distributing literature. While the court upheld a ban on the solicitation of funds as constitutional, the court also determined that there was a critical distinction between the solicitation of funds and the distribution of literature in public venues. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in this case.

• ISKON and Brian Rumbaugh v. Walter Lee and The New York Port Authority (1992)

The Supreme Court turned back another attempt to ban the distribution of literature at airport terminals. The decisions in Jews for Jesus and Kokinda supported this case and further guaranteed that the distribution of literature would continue to be protected by the First Amendment. Jay Sekulow served as co-counsel in this case.

Religious Liberty

• Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)

In one of the most far-reaching decisions of its time, the Supreme Court cleared the way for public school students across America to express their religious faith openly and constitutionally. The Court further determined that the Equal Access Act was constitutional and applied to the formation of student-led and student-initiated Bible and prayer clubs on campuses at public schools across America. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

In its decision, the Supreme Court said, “There is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect.” (Emphasis in original court opinion)

The Mergens decision has resulted in the formation of more than 15,000 religious clubs in public schools across America and remains one of the most cited cases in the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the impact of religion in public places.

• Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches School District (1993)

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that religious organizations must be treated equally in the use of public school facilities after hours, striking down a ban imposed by a New York state agency that prevented churches from utilizing public school facilities and other government buildings after hours for religious activities. This groundbreaking decision ensured that churches and other religious organizations would receive the same treatment given to non-religious organizations in the use of government-owned facilities – particularly public schools. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

• Gentala v. City of Tuscon (2001)

This case centered on the discriminatory treatment of a religious event. A city government refused to permit organizers of a National Day of Prayer event to utilize city facilities in the same manner afforded to other community groups. The Supreme Court granted review of this case, removed the lower court decision, and sent it back to the Court of Appeals to be reconsidered in light of existing Supreme Court precedence.

• Campbell v. St. Tammany Parish School Board (2001)

After a Court of Appeals affirmed a ban on religious groups using government facilities because their meetings started with prayers, the ACLJ asked the Supreme Court to consider this case. The Supreme Court granted review of the case, removed the lower court decision, and sent it back to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration consistent with Supreme Court jurisprudence.

• Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000)

The Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of student-led prayer at high school sporting events. While the court held that the school’s involvement in the prayer was unconstitutional, the court also recognized that “nothing in the Constitution as interpreted by this court prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day.” Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

Human Life

The ACLJ is committed to the protection of human life at all of its stages, and its legal work has resulted in critical decisions by the Supreme Court in the defense of the life of the unborn.

• Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic (1993)

The National Organization for Women had attempted to use a statute from 1871 to stop those committed to the pro-life message from exercising their First Amendment rights outside abortion clinics. The Supreme Court accepted the argument presented by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, in which he said that this 122-year-old law did not apply to pro-life demonstrators, because opposition to abortion was focused on the destruction of human life and not the women who were seeking an abortion. The Supreme Court determined that the law could not be used to silence pro-life demonstrators. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

• Feminist Women’s Health Center v. Blythe (1994)

After a Court of Appeals upheld the creation of a speech-free zone around abortion clinics to prevent pro-life demonstrators from expressing their First Amendment rights, the ACLJ asked the Supreme Court to consider this case. The Supreme Court granted review, removed the lower court decision, and sent it back to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of Supreme Court precedence.

• Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo, Inc. v. Williams (1994)

A state supreme court upheld a speech-free zone outside abortion clinics that prevented pro-life demonstrators from exercising their First Amendment rights. The ACLJ asked the Supreme Court to consider the case. The Supreme Court granted review, removed the lower court decision, and returned it to the state supreme court for further consideration in light of existing Supreme Court precedence.

• Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York (1997)

The Supreme Court focused on the constitutionality of “floating” speech free “bubble zones” around abortion clinics. In an 8-1 decision, the court determined the speech-free zones were unconstitutional and a violation of free speech. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

• Hill v. Colorado (2000)

The Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a Colorado law that restricted free speech activity outside abortion clinics. Jay Sekulow served as lead counsel and presented oral arguments in the case.

• Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women, et. al. (2003)

The Supreme Court determined that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute (RICO) – a federal statute targeting drug dealers and organized crime – could not be used against pro-life demonstrators. Jay Sekulow served as counsel of record for Operation Rescue in this case. The Supreme Court concluded that pro-life demonstrators were not racketeers engaged in extortion and that the RICO statute could not be used against them.