Shurtleff v. Boston (U.S.)
The City of Boston has long allowed private groups to request to use a flagpole outside Boston City Hall to raise flags of their choosing. The city had not denied a single request until the director of a group called Camp Constitution asked to fly a Christian flag. In the city’s view, it was free to fly only the flags it prefers because they communicated the government’s own message.
Notre Dame Law School’s Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reject that capacious understanding of government speech. The brief demonstrates that governmental bodies increasingly have moved to exclude religious voices from public discourse by claiming private speech as their own. The First Amendment squarely prohibits singling out religious expression for hostile treatment when the government creates a public forum for private speech.
In 2022, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Boston’s efforts to disfavor religious speech. Because the flying of private groups’ flags was not a form of government speech, the city unconstitutionally discriminated against Camp Constitution based on its religious viewpoint when it refused to allow the group to hold a flag-raising ceremony at City Hall Plaza like other private groups.
Read Our Brief
- Amicus Brief in Support of Petitioners (U.S.) (Nov. 22, 2021)
Learn More About Our Work
- "Supreme Court must determine religious voices deserve a place in the public square, experts say" (Jan. 13, 2022)
- "Religious Liberty Initiative files amicus brief in Supreme Court case Shurtleff v. Boston" (Nov. 24, 2021)
Court Decisions
U.S. Supreme Court
- Opinion (May 2, 2022)
Appellate Court (U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit)
- Opinion (Jan. 22, 2021)
Trial Court (U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts)
- Memorandum and Order (Feb. 4, 2020)