Great Falls, USA - The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to get involved in the dispute between Great Falls and one of its residents over the use of Jesus Christ's name in town meeting prayers.
This means "I won," said Darla Wynne, who sued the town.
Both the U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with Wynne's assertion that the town was promoting one religion over others in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution.
A writ of certiorari filed by the Town Council was denied Tuesday by the U.S. Supreme Court.
That ends the town's attempts to overturn lower court rulings that prevent the town council from referring to Jesus Christ in its prayers at the beginning of meetings.
Denial of the request to hear the case does not mean the Supreme Court is agreeing with the lower courts or that it is not, according to legal scholars. The court gives no explanation when it refuses to hear a case.
Wynne filed her lawsuit in 2001 after the council refused to change its prayers so they would no longer refer directly to the Christian faith.
She was not asking that the council refrain from praying but that it refer to "a generic deity such as 'God'" without reference to a deity associated with one religion.
The district court agreed after a 2003 trial with Wynne's position that the Town Council was violating the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
The town then appealed that ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals, where a three-judge panel agreed with the district court's decision. The full appeals court refused to hear an appeal of that ruling.
Once again, the town appealed, this time to the Supreme Court in early 2005.
On Tuesday, the court issued an order listing the case among those it would not consider.
"I am disappointed the high court declined to correct the lower court's decision forbidding references to Jesus Christ in prayers before Great Falls town council meetings," S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster said Tuesday after hearing about the high court decision. "I hope that in the future, members of the federal judiciary will see things differently."