In the fall of 2015, Cambridge Christian School earned the right to compete in the state football championship for the Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) 2A division, against University Christian School. The game was scheduled to be played at the Citrus Bowl in Orlando, Florida. Since both teams had a tradition of pre-game prayer, Cambridge asked to use the loudspeaker to begin with a brief prayer before the kick-off. The FHSAA denied the request arguing that it could be viewed as an endorsement of religion since the prayer would be given using government-owned equipment.
First Liberty sent a demand letter to FHSSA on behalf of Cambridge arguing that association’s actions violated the school’s Constitutional rights. When the FHSAA refused to adopt a policy that would uphold the religious freedom of Florida students, First Liberty and the law firm Greenberg Traurig filed a federal lawsuit against the FHSAA.
A Tampa district magistrate issued a report and recommendation stating the two Christian schools cannot pray over the loudspeaker at the Citrus Bowl, prompting attorneys to file an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
In November 2019, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that Cambridge Christian School’s argument that its free speech and free exercise rights were violated had merit and should proceed. However, three years later the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida issued a decision affirming the FHSAA rule prohibiting the two Christian schools from praying over the loudspeaker.
But, following a subsequent appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in September of 2024, a three-judge panel affirmed the lower court’s decision, as did the “en banc” (full panel) of the Eleventh Circuit in February of 2025.
In June 2025, attorneys for Cambridge Christian asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the Eleventh Circuit’s decision, and to limit or reverse Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000), which also held that private prayer over a stadium loudspeaker could be deemed government speech.
“The Eleventh Circuit’s decision to label the prayer as government speech abandons the foundational promises of the First Amendment that are meant to guarantee individual freedom,” said Jeremy Dys, Senior Counsel at First Liberty Institute. “Here, the prayer requested cannot be government speech because the only view to be expressed would have come from Cambridge, not the FHSAA.”
Jesse Panuccio, of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, said, “The Supreme Court has warned that the government-speech doctrine is subject to ‘dangerous misuse.’ That occurred here, where the lower courts held that the prayers of Christian schools somehow become government speech just because they occur in the context of a state-organized football game. If the Eleventh Circuit’s decision is left standing, it will reignite the very religious discrimination the Supreme Court has prohibited in several cases over the last two decades.”
News Release
For Immediate Release: 6.10.25
Contact: John Manning, media@firstliberty.org
Direct: 972-941-4453
Florida Christian School Asks Supreme Court to Reverse Decision Prohibiting Prayer Before Football Games
Florida high school league prohibited prayer over the loudspeaker before a football game between two Christian schools.
Washington, D.C.—Attorneys for Cambridge Christian School (FL) asked the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit holding that it did not violate the First Amendment for a state athletic league to ban two Christian schools from praying over the loudspeaker before their championship football. The petition also asks the Court to limit or reverse Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000), which also held that private prayer over a stadium loudspeaker could be deemed government speech. First Liberty Institute and the law firms Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, Winston and Strawn, LLP, and Jones Day represent Cambridge Christian.
You can read the petition, here.
“The Eleventh Circuit’s decision to label the prayer as government speech abandons the foundational promises of the First Amendment that are meant to guarantee individual freedom,” said Jeremy Dys, Senior Counsel at First Liberty Institute. “Here, the prayer requested cannot be government speech because the only view to be expressed would have come from Cambridge, not the FHSAA.”
Jesse Panuccio, of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, said, “The Supreme Court has warned that the government-speech doctrine is subject to ‘dangerous misuse.’ That occurred here, where the lower courts held that the prayers of Christian schools somehow become government speech just because they occur in the context of a state-organized football game. If the Eleventh Circuit’s decision is left standing, it will reignite the very religious discrimination the Supreme Court has prohibited in several cases over the last two decades.”
In 2015, the Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) forbade Cambridge Christian School and its opponent—another Christian school—from praying over the loudspeaker at the Citrus Bowl ahead of the state championship football game. The FHSAA claimed Santa Fe required it to censor Cambridge’s speech because the stadium was city-owned and the FHSAA a government actor. The Eleventh Circuit eventually agreed, concluding that the requested prayer of Cambridge Christian was government speech, despite the many private messages the FHSAA allowed over the loudspeaker, including secular welcoming messages, private corporate promotions, and halftime music and commentary by the schools.
The petition asks:
(1) “Whether Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), compels a finding of government speech where two private Christian schools sought to engage in communal prayer over a loudspeaker before a football game organized by a state athletic association that otherwise permitted a wide array of private speech over the loudspeaker and should therefore be overruled in light of this Court’s later holdings in Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. 218 (2017), Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 596 U.S. 243 (2022), and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022), and
(2) “Whether the endorsement factor of the government- speech doctrine revives Lemon’s ‘endorsement test offshoot’ that ‘this Court long ago abandoned,’ Kennedy, 597 U.S. at 534, by providing a special veto for a private party’s religious speech on any government owned platform.”
###
About First Liberty Institute
First Liberty Institute is a non-profit public interest law firm and the largest legal organization in the nation dedicated exclusively to defending religious freedom for all Americans.
To arrange an interview, contact John Manning at media@firstliberty.org.
12/5/22 – First Liberty’s Reply Brief
8/8/22 – First Liberty Initial Brief
11/13/19 – Eleventh Circuit Opinion
10/20/17 – First Liberty Opening Brief
01/26/16 – First Liberty Demand Letter
Video Credit: Polyphonic Image, courtesy of First Liberty
Photo Credit: Beth Dare Photography, courtesy of First Liberty
 |
|
|
CASE SUMMARY
PRESS RELEASES
LEGAL DOCUMENTS
PHOTOS AND VIDEO
