Posted on 11/08/2016 1:58:56 PM PST by Coleus
SOUTH BEND — The student and parents suing Concord schools over the annual Christmas Spectacular are still seeking a court order barring the school from reverting to older versions of the show that contain live Nativity scenes.
In a filing last week in U.S. District Court in South Bend, the anonymous Concord Community Schools student and three parents suing the school district say school officials' promises to use mannequins instead of live actors to depict the Nativity aren't enough.
A court filing in the case by the school district in early October says Concord Community Schools Superintendent John Trout and the Concord school board have reached consensus not to include live Nativity scenes in the Christmas Spectacular going forward, among other things, a key point in the lawsuit.
But in an Oct. 26 filing, the last one expected from the plaintiffs before U.S. District Judge Jon DeGuilio decides the final points, American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana lawyer Gavin Rose seeks a more definitive ruling. The ACLU and the Madison, Wis.-based Freedom From Religion Foundation are representing the student and parents, who have maintained that the show violates U.S. constitutional prohibitions against endorsement of religion.
"Throughout the course of this litigation, the school corporation has repeatedly attempted to justify its unconstitutional behavior and has failed to make it absolutely clear that it will not revert to previous versions of the Christmas Spectacular in the future," Rose writes.
Though the live Nativity scene was removed from the 2015 installment of the program, Rose seeks a permanent injunction barring Concord High School from using pre-2015 programs with actors as the blueprint for future shows. In the absence of a permanent injunction, he argues the school may go back to older versions, noting "mounting community pressure on the school to revert to the pre-2015 version of the event."
Last September, DeGuilio ruled that the revamped version of the Christmas show last year, which used mannequins to depict the Nativity, did not violate the U.S. Constitution. The changes – which also included a shorter Nativity scene segment and mentions of Hanukkah and Kwanzaa – stemmed from the lawsuit, filed Oct. 7, 2015.
But left unresolved – and the remaining parts of the case that DeGuilio has to decide – are rulings on whether the 2014 show and a scrapped 2015 program proposal using live Nativity actors violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. That prohibits governmental entities or schools from endorsing religion or forcing people to take part in religious activities.
School officials maintain that the remaining points at issue are moot given DeGuilio's ruling from September saying the 2015 program passed constitutional muster. In another filing last week – expected to be the last from Concord schools – the school district's attorney, Thomas Wheeler, also notes school officials' assurances they won't revert to pre-2015 versions of the Christmas Spectacular.
Wheeler referenced the school's proposed settlement that called for formalizing a preliminary injunction ordered by DeGuilio last year that prevented Concord High School from including a live Nativity scene in its 2015 Christmas show. The Concord student and parents who filed the suit rejected the proposal.
"The school continues to believe that based on its voluntary cessation of the challenged conduct, the case is moot and there is no need for permanent injunctive relief," Wheeler writes. However, "in the event that this court disagrees, simply making the preliminary injunctive relief already ordered by this court permanent would be appropriate and appears to be acceptable to both parties."
Also still at issue are nominal damages of $10 the student and parents seek stemming from their exposure to the 2014 installment of the Christmas show.
Would they submit to a live beheading of a Christian by their Muslim students in recognition of the season???
Grinches. If religion is nothing more than a matter of personal preference, then it would be equally silly to condemn a celebration of the color yellow because other people preferred red.
I do not know why the churches do not sponsor CHRISTMAS celebrations as community programs and just invite the schools
If they come OK if not stay home
and BTW if the Christians just did their own show and stayed away from this PC crap, then maybe the schools would do a Frosty the Snowman “January Spectacular”
Another reminder of why electing Trump is so important - the appointment of judges...
I am offended!!
bump
he has to get rid of the 9th circus.
I have no idea if he has the authority to get rid of the 9th. However, he does have the authority to appoint new judges when vacancies occur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.