WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court docket appeared uncertain of Boston’s refusal to fly a flag symbolizing Christianity earlier than Metropolis Corridor after dozens of different third-party flags ran on the pole, with a number of justices suggesting that native officers learn too strictly the constitutional rule towards institution of faith.
A metropolis commissioner thought the Christian Flag, a century-old banner consisting of a white subject with a pink Latin cross in a blue canton, violated the “so-called separation of church and state,” Justice
Neil Gorsuch
mentioned throughout Tuesday arguments. “If that’s mistaken, and if all of us agree that’s mistaken,” he mentioned, “what’s left to resolve?”
Boston Metropolis Corridor has three flagpoles in entrance. The American and Massachusetts flags fly from the primary two; the third often shows the municipal banner however from time to time, on the request of personal teams, it has run flags representing different international locations or specific causes.
“We wish to create an setting within the Metropolis the place everybody feels included, and is handled with respect,” the flagpole coverage acknowledged. “We additionally wish to increase consciousness in Better Boston and past concerning the many international locations and cultures around the globe.”
Harold Shurtleff, a former John Birch Society official who runs a right-wing instructional program known as Camp Structure, filed an utility to fly the Christian flag in reference to an hourlong occasion on Sept. 17, 2017, commemorating Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, which celebrates the signing of the Structure in 1787.
When the town turned him down, he sued, however obtained nowhere within the federal trial and appellate courts. He discovered a extra receptive viewers on the Supreme Court docket, the place he gained help not solely from conservative teams, but additionally the Biden administration and the American Civil Liberties Union.
Whereas authorities may most likely exclude flags from terrorist organizations, if the town permitted a gaggle to “increase a Black Lives Matter flag, they most likely must increase a Proud Boys flag. That’s simply what the First Modification calls for,” mentioned Justice Division lawyer Sopan Joshi, who argued on behalf of the administration.
Below Supreme Court docket precedents, authorities entities have latitude to decide on which messages they promote in their very own voice. However once they open a platform for public dialogue, they will’t discriminate primarily based on the opinions expressed.
In 2015, the court docket held that Texas needn’t place a Sons of Accomplice Veterans emblem on its license plates, regardless of providing a commemorative program permitting personal teams to sponsor tags. That adopted a 2009 resolution {that a} Utah city’s show of a Ten Commandments monument didn’t obligate it to position in a public park a monument displaying the Seven Aphorisms of Summum, a spiritual group recognized for its observe of mummification.
“Town can not successfully use its flagpole to speak its personal message if it should stay impartial and in addition carry the other message,” Boston’s legal professional, Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, informed the court docket.
“Non-public events are free to wave their flags on Metropolis Corridor Plaza and even increase a brief flagpole there, however they can’t commandeer the Metropolis’s flagpole to ship a message the town doesn’t endorse,” he mentioned.
However a number of justices mentioned the information of the coverage instructed the flagpole was open to all comers, till the phrase “Christian” triggered the commissioner’s veto.
“You understand, a metropolis couldn’t put a cross, for my part, on Metropolis Corridor” itself, mentioned Justice Elena Kagan. “However, within the context of a system the place flags go up, flags go down, completely different individuals have completely different sorts of flags, then it’s a violation of the free speech a part of the First Modification.”
Over a 12-year interval, Boston authorized some 284 flag-raising occasions, though the quantity contains repeated show of specific flags. Some flags flown, nevertheless, weren’t included within the official document.
“In 2014 then-Mayor [Marty] Walsh raised the flag of the Montreal Canadiens, a hockey staff that I feel had simply defeated the Boston Bruins in a playoff collection,” Mr. Joshi mentioned.
“Effectively, I can perceive why it wasn’t put within the document,” mentioned Chief Justice
John Roberts,
sparking some courtroom laughter.
Corrections & Amplifications
Justice Neil Gorsuch spoke throughout Tuesday arguments. An earlier model of this text incorrectly mentioned the Justice spoke throughout Monday arguments. (Corrected on Jan. 18)
Write to Jess Bravin at jess.bravin+1@wsj.com
Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Firm, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8