US court rules for Boston in Satanic Temple opening prayer lawsuit

Not today, Satan.

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit The Satanic Temple filed against the City of Boston, ruling that the City Council did not discriminate against the group when it chose not to grant its request to deliver an opening prayer at a weekly meeting.

“Invocation speakers are invited at the discretion of the individual city councilors, which heightens Establishment Clause concerns,” U.S. District Court Judge Angel Kelley wrote in a 31-page ruling filed on Monday.

“The evidence on record, however, suggests that the city councilors’ discretion was not exercised in such a way that individuals or groups were excluded from giving an invocation because of their religious beliefs.”

Kelley said the City Council “did not allow some requests while denying others.” Rather, she wrote that “the city councilors’ primary motivation in selecting an invocation speaker,” based on evidence reviewed by the court, “has always been the individual or organization’s involvement in the community.”

The Satanic Temple filed suit against the city in January 2021, asserting that the Council violated both the U.S. and state constitutions when it failed to allow the group to open one of its weekly meetings with a prayer, court documents state.

The U.S. District Court found no violation to the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states one religion must not be officially preferred over another.

Kelley noted that while the majority of the City Council’s invocation speakers “have been undoubtedly of a Christian denomination,” speakers of other faiths have also been invited, allowing for a “diversity of religious views.”

She also dismissed an alleged violation to the Free Exercise Clause, finding that the Council’s legislative prayer practice did not make it “more difficult” for The Satanic Temple to practice its religion.

The judge did agree in part, however, with The Satanic Temple’s assertions that the tendency of councilors to select religious leaders they have done business with, or have ties to, could be seen as political.

“There is no dispute that the selection of the invocation speaker is left to each city councilor’s discretion, and there are no formal written policies governing this procedure,” Kelley wrote. “This leaves ample room for abuse, which concerns the court. However, the lack of a formal, written policy does not by itself create a constitutional problem.”

Representatives for The Satanic Temple did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

Lucien Greaves, one of the co-founders of the Temple, told the Herald upon the suit’s filing that the group doesn’t literally believe in and worship Satan, but that doesn’t mean they don’t take their religion seriously.