It was wholly (or rather holy) appropriate that the role of religion at athletic sporting events was the hot topic at the annual conference for the Sports and Recreation Law Association in Albuquerque, N.M., earlier this month.
After all, the recent U.S. Supreme Court case Santa Fe Independent School District (TX) v. Doe (2000) was still fresh on the minds of many sports law professors in attendance. And then there was the curious lawsuit of Marszalek v. Fadlallah & Dearborn Schools.
Each was the subject of a session. One presentation was more analytical in nature, while the other was permeated by narration and passion.
The Santa Fe discussion was led by Todd Seidler, a professor at the University of New Mexico. He was joined by Scott Marley, University of New Mexico; Jennifer Beck, Kennesaw State University; Bernie Goldfine, Kennesaw State University; and Andy Gillentine, University of Miami.
Together, the team conducted an analysis of actual prayer practices at high school athletic contests, which revealed that on a nationwide basis school-official-led prayer occurs regularly. This demonstrated that the Santa Fe ruling, which ascribed liability to school districts that allow such practices, was not being adhered to.
“If school officials, coaches or administrators lead prayers, you have a problem,” Seidler told the audience.
Rather, the Santa Fe ruling only confirmed the right of students to pray before, during, and after athletic events.
The researchers surveyed 585 athletic directors, asking them about a host of topics, such as religious activities at games; who leads the religious activities; whether the school has religious activity policies; and the religious beliefs of the respondent.
They also asked about their awareness of the Santa Fe ruling. Sixty-percent of athletic directors reported not being familiar with this court decision.
“A further examination of the data indicated that as knowledge of the ruling increased the probability of having student-led prayer increased,” wrote the professors. “Curiously enough, this investigation found that the athletic directors who considered themselves to be religious were more likely to be knowledgeable of the Supreme Court ruling, suggesting that prayer practices that fall outside the boundaries of the law do not transpire out of ignorance of the landmark Supreme Court decision. Due to the significant amount of improper and unregulated prayer entwined with interscholastic athletics in the U.S., increasing legal challenges may follow.”
Indeed, Seidler noted that, since 2006, the number of religious expression cases has increased 30 percent.
None of them was more fascinating than Marszalek v. Fadlallah & Dearborn Schools.
Paul J. Batista, a sports law professor at Texas A&M University, presented on the case in what was likely the best attended session of the conference.
Batista described the circumstances leading to the lawsuit, noting that the principal (Imad Fadlallah) of Fordson High School in Dearborn, Mich., “is a dedicated religious man, who sees his religion as the most important thing in his life.
“The school’s wrestling coach (Gerald Marszalek), a 35-year veteran at the school, regarded as a ‘legend’ in wrestling circles … is also a dedicated religious man.”
Fadlallah is Muslim, while Marszalek is a Christian. The vast majority of the students at the school are Muslim.
When Fadlallah became concerned that Marszalek and his assistant coach were trying to convert wrestlers to Christianity, he started trying to curtail their influence and ultimately fired the coach. The coach sued alleging violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantees of Free Exercise, Speech and Association, the 14th Amendment guarantees of Equal Protection and Due Process, and various protections contained in the Michigan Constitution.
“The irony of this case is that the vast majority of students … are Muslim, while the coach is a Christian,” wrote Batista. “While many well-intentioned and devoutly religious Americans support religious activities in public schools, this case represents a shocking reminder of the serious implications arising when one religion is favored or promoted over another. … This case serves as a warning for those who promote religion in public schools.”
Seidler pointed out that “prayer policies are rare.” Schools and districts typically “don’t develop a policy until there is a complaint.” By then, it may be too late.
