I.

Primary Effect Neither Advances nor Impedes Religion

a. Gaylor v. US 10th Circuit (1996)

1. In God We Trust symbolizes the historical role of religion in our society. The motto also serves

the purposes of formalizing our medium of exchange, fostering patriotism and expressing

confidence in our future. The primary effect is not to advance religion but rather is a form of

ceremonial deism, which throughout historical usage and ubiquity cannot be reasonably understood

to convey government approval of religion. The motto also does not create an intimate relationship

of the type that suggests unconstitutional entanglement of church and state. Also notes the

reasonable observer would not view the practice as an endorsement of religion

2. Religion would not be advanced nor impeded, it would be solidified, protected where it is

3. Marsh v. Chambers (1983)

1. Court recognized the traditional aspect of the practice of opening sessions of Congress with Prayer,

which has existed as long as Congress itself. By setting this day aside for optional observance, the

Court would not impede or advance religion, but protect religion against the tide of change for

those who would like it protected.

2. Lower court agreed, The recognition of a Day of Prayerwhile perhaps harmonizing with

religious canons, does not promote or endorse them and therefore does not affect the standing of

religion in the state either by advancing it or impeding it.

b. Lower court concluded that the primary effect of the day doesnt endorse, advance, or impede religion,

because it imposed no duty upon any citizen to pray or attend the commemorative event

c. Not government endorsed, just set aside for observation

1. Lynch v. Donnelly (1894)

 1. State-sponsored crche display in a park owned by a nonprofit organization deemed

constitutional because Est. clause does not require complete separation of church and state

but instead mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions; the

governments establishing the Day of Prayer will advance this goal by setting aside time to

accommodate all religions on one day, which is a measure that will bring about greater equity

for all religions. The government isnt entangling itself with any one religion, but instead it is

acknowledging all of the people who want to take the time to celebrate whatever they believe

in.

2. In God We Trust doesnt mean government is endorsing religion, its existing alongside

d. Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014)

1. Prayers recited by local clergy recited as part of the opening of town board meetings in Greece, NY

held up as constitutional. Practice is traditional and there is no discrimination regarding who

offers a prayer- inclusive of minority religions, as well as majority (Christianity), and no coercion

with non-adherents; The Day of Prayer offers people of every different religion interested in

participating the opportunity to celebrate their religion with no fear of discrimination, but those who

dont celebrate religion have no need to go to services or take part in any religious events that take

place on the day. Alleghany v. ACLU

e. Allegheny v. ACLU- crche displayed in courthouse, menorah displayed outside of city-county building next

to a Christmas tree, crche deemed unconstitutional but menorah was constitutional. Crche stood alone in a

courthouse, which indicates a relationship between the court and Christianity, but the menorah/Christmas

tree display are outside the building, and stand together with a sign saluting liberty, creating a holiday

setting without forcing religion onto anyone who doesnt want it. The displays do no more than celebrate

the holiday season and acknowledge the historical background and the religious, as well as secular, nature of
 the Chanukah and Christmas holidays; the Day of Prayer isnt forcing religion onto anyone, and more than

anything is a celebration of all the good religion does in a community, secular or non secular

II. Not Excessive Entanglement

a. The Day of Prayer does not foster excessive entanglement between the government and religion because the

government doesnt actually call for any religious activity, nor does it affiliate itself with any religion; it

simply has set aside the day as a way of recognizing those who do want a day to celebrate their religion, the

way it sets aside Memorial Day and Veterans Day for those who wish to celebrate soldiers, and

Thanksgiving for those who wish to celebrate the first Americans

b. Government recognizes importance of culture in life but especially in American history and tradition, much

of which is centered around religion in some form

1. In Marsh v. Chambers, the Court ruled in favor of the tradition of opening sessions of Congress

with prayer, declaring that the practice did not constitute excessive entanglement because it was

more a question of tradition than piety.

2. The Day of Prayer in question, like the tradition of opening Congress with prayer, is a matter of

strengthening community and respectone of the means used to achieve those objectives is

tradition through religion, but religion is a part of American history.

c. The Marsh ruling was upheld in Town of Greece v. Galloway, recognizing that the town did not discriminate

against minority religions when offering prayer, further solidifying the position that observance, if not

prioritizing one faith over another, is not excessive entanglement.

III. Conclusion

a. The Day of Prayer achieves many secular purposes through non-secular means. It involves religion, but that

is not the primary purpose. The purpose is respect, tradition, community, and rejuvenation. The day is all-
 inclusive and does not constitute excessive government entanglement with religion because there is no actual

government endorsement of any religion, merely the opportunity offered to observe religions traditions as

well as honor veterans and strengthen community ties. No religion is either advanced or impeded, merely

protected, while citizens who chose not to observe suffer no consequences.

b. Your Honor, the impact of the Courts decision extends far beyond this case. The Court has the opportunity

here to recognize the beneficial impact religion can have on peoples lives, and to treat every religion

equally. Furthermore, the Day of Prayer sets aside time to honor those brave men and women who have

risked and, in some cases, given, their lives to our country. Were the Court to declare the Day of Prayer

unconstitutional, the Court would not only impede the religious observance of every citizen whose religion is

not federally recognized, but also strike a blow to the centuries-old traditions that come with religion.

Declaring the Day unconstitutional would deny veterans the respect they deserve and deny communities a

chance to stand together in support of one another. Living in an increasingly fast-paced world, many people

arent observing as they might have in times past because there is simply too much else going on.

c. Respondent respectfully asks that the court affirm the lower courts decision and declare the Day of

Prayer to be Constitutional