SCOTUS: Boston violated group's constitutional rights by refusing to fly Christian flag

The United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that the city of Boston was in violation of the Constitution when it refused to allow a local organization to fly a Christian flag at City Hall.

Although the case was reported by the media as a religious case, ultimately the Court’s decision was based on the tenants of free-speech and the Justices argued that city officials effectively created a public forum when it allowed other organizations to fly their flags in front of City Hall for commemorative events, NBC News reported.

Denying the same treatment for the Christian flag, therefore, is a violation of free expression.

"When the government encourages diverse expression — say, by creating a forum for debate — the First Amendment prevents it from discriminating against speakers based on their viewpoint," Justice Breyer wrote in the decision.

"The city’s lack of meaning­ful involvement in the selection of flags or the crafting of their messages leads us to classify the flag raisings as pri­vate, not government, speech — though nothing prevents Boston from changing its policies going forward," he added.

The ruling was ultimately a victory for a group called Camp Constitution, whose mission is “to enhance understanding of the country’s Judeo-Christian heritage,” the Wall Street Journal reported.  

The group’s founder, Harold Shurtleff, applied to use one of the three flagpoles in front of city hall but was ultimately denied, driving him to sue the city.

The city, however, maintained that flying a Christian flag at City Hall would amount to an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion.  

Ultimately, the Court ruled that the city could not censor a religious message in a public forum.

"Under the Constitution, a government may not treat reli­gious persons, religious organizations, or religious speech as second-class," Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in his opinion.

A spokesperson for the city said officials are “carefully reviewing the court’s decision and its recognition of city governments’ authority to operate similar programs. As we consider next steps, we will ensure that future City of Boston programs are aligned with this decision.”