Prayer suit continues to evolve

If there’s one thing we should all be aware of by now when it comes to controversial court cases, it’s that it takes a very long time to sort through and reach a conclusion.

Judge Joseph J. Farnan Jr. ruled recently that the Indian River School District School Board’s policy regarding prayers before regular school board meetings is not unconstitutional — almost five years after the board members were named as defendants in a lawsuit regarding the practice.

The judge determined that the school board is a legislative body, and cited a 1983 case as precedent.

“We are very pleased,” said Jason Gosselin, attorney for the school district. “It was obvious that the judge put a lot of time into the arguments and considered the material.” Goseelin added that he had read that the plaintiffs will appeal the ruling.

Yes, we have not heard the end of this case yet. The plaintiffs will undoubtedly appeal the decision, and the case will most likely be heard by another judge. There will be more witnesses, more studying of old cases and more passionate arguments made by both sides.

And we’d argue that all of this is a good thing.

This is a major issue, and one that affects more than the Indian River School Board. It could turn out to be far-reaching on a national scale and a real test of the United States Constitution. We believe it’s important that it be argued, heard and decided at every level imaginable, and that when it reaches its ultimate conclusion, the decision is clear and well-defined.

We won’t take a side in this argument because, quite frankly, our own staff is just as divided as the rest of you. It’s controversial. It involves free speech. And it involves faith. That’s going to cause divide every single time.

But we all agree that the best scenario for this is for the case to be heard by many, and the legalities studied to exhaustion. There should be clarity at the end, and it should leave no room for misinterpretation.