Posted on by Californiacontrarian

As Best I Can Tell


As best I can tell very few, including yours truly, are familiar with Harold Shurtleff. Granted even though Harold Robert Shurtleff  (January 6, 1883 – December 6, 1938) was a Harvard graduate and an American painter, (who wrote a book describing who actually lived in colonial log cabins), this is not the Harold Shurtleff to whom I am referring. I am referencing the Harold Shurtleff who filed suit against the city of Boston in 2017 … Shurtleff vs. Boston.

From the First Amendment Encyclopedia:

U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Boston violated a private organization’s First Amendment religious free exercise rights by refusing to allow them to temporarily raise a Christian flag on a flagpole outside Boston City Hall, given that Boston had previously allowed various organizations to temporarily raise secular flags on the same flagpole.

The court’s ruling depended on its conclusion that, given Boston’s policies, temporarily raising a flag on this flagpole outside Boston City Hall was an act of private expression, not government speech.

The court’s decision was narrowly applied to the facts in this specific case. The court did not rule that as a general matter raising a flag on a flagpole outside a government building is an act of private expression. On the contrary, the court’s reasoning suggested that usually such acts are government speech.

There are three flagpoles outside Boston City Hall. One flies the United States flag. Another flies the Massachusetts state flag. The third typically flies the Boston city flag. But for many years, Boston has allowed other groups to request to temporarily raise other flags on the third flagpole. Most of the flags have been those of other governmental entities or have been associated with a day of observance in Boston.

In 2017, Harold Shurtleff — on behalf of Camp Constitution, a private organization seeking to “enhance understanding” of the United States’ “Judeo-Christian moral heritage” — requested to temporarily fly “the Christian flag,” which is a flag used to represent Christianity by many Protestant churches and denominations in the U.S.

Citing concerns about violating the First Amendment’s establishment clause, Boston twice denied Shurtleff’s request. After the second denial, Shurtleff sued.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions. The key reason why the court reversed was because it disagreed with the lower courts that temporarily raising the Christian flag would have been government speech, not private action.

This decision is important for two reasons.

First: It was unanimous.

Second from PJ Media:

Shurtleff restored the right of every American to practice and express their religious beliefs, as guaranteed by the First Amendment. As Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver put it recently …

This 9-0 decision from the Supreme Court involving the Christian flag continues to have an impact across the nation. The clear message from the Supreme Court is that government must not discriminate based on viewpoint. The government cannot favor one viewpoint and censor another and cannot censor religious viewpoints under the guise of government speech. Any governments that are ignoring this ruling are setting themselves up for potential lawsuits.

As best I can tell, this decision will have far-reaching implications for a long time! 

Thank you, Harold Shurtleff.

2/22/23

47 Replies to “As Best I Can Tell”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.