Supreme Court docket Guidelines Towards Boston In Christian Flag Case

WASHINGTON (AP) — A unanimous Supreme Court docket dominated Monday that Boston violated the free speech rights of a conservative activist when it refused his request to fly a Christian flag on a flagpole outdoors Metropolis Corridor.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the courtroom that the town discriminated towards the activist, Harold Shurtleff, due to his “spiritual viewpoint,” despite the fact that it had routinely permitted functions for the usage of one of many three flagpoles outdoors Metropolis Corridor that fly the U.S., Massachusetts and Boston flags.

Sometimes, the town takes down its personal pennant and briefly hoists one other flag.

Shurtleff and his Camp Structure needed to fly a white banner with a pink cross on a blue background within the higher left nook, known as the Christian flag.

Breyer mentioned the case hinged on whether or not the flag-flying is an act of the federal government, by which case Boston can do no matter it needs, or non-public events like Shurtleff.

Breyer wrote that “the town’s lack of significant involvement within the number of flags or the crafting of their messages leads us to categorise the flag raisings as non-public, not authorities, speech—although nothing prevents Boston from altering its insurance policies going ahead.”

Town has mentioned that within the occasion of a loss on the Supreme Court docket it in all probability will change its coverage to take extra management of what flags can fly.

The case is Shurtleff v. Boston, 20-1800.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.