^{7th Circuit Court of Appeals Permits School District to Hold Graduation Ceremonies in Church} 

In Doe v. Elmbrook School District, No. 10-2922, a case decided on September 9, 2011, the 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a school district in Wisconsin did not violate the First Amendment when it held its graduation ceremonies in a rented church.  Although this case involved a Wisconsin school district, the 7^th Circuit has jurisdiction over Illinois so its decision and reasoning is relevant for Illinois school districts. 

In Doe, two high schools decided to hold their graduation ceremonies in a local church after their student bodies chose the church in a student election as the best venue for graduation.  Before this decision, the schools had held their graduation ceremonies in their gyms, which were hot, cramped, and uncomfortable.   The impetus for moving graduations to a new venue came from the student body, not the administration.  The schools used the church for about a decade before this lawsuit was filed.  The plaintiffs in Doe were current and former students and their parents who objected to the district's use of the church as a violation of the First Amendment.  The plaintiffs sought damages and a permanent injunction which would prevent the district from using the church in the future.

In deciding this case, the 7^th Circuit had to determine whether the district's use of the church constituted impermissible religious coercion or establishment of religion.  The plaintiffs argued that they were coerced into participating in religion because they had to enter a "sacred space" and view religious symbols.  However, the court held that this was not sufficient to constitute coercion because the plaintiffs were not forced to take religious pamphlets, sit through attempts at proselytization, or appear to affirm their adherence to any religious principles.  School officials made no attempt to involve religion in the graduation ceremony.  Instead, the encounter with religion was purely passive and incidental to the entirely secular graduation ceremony.

As for whether the district's use of the church amounted to an establishment of religion, the court applied the familiar three-pronged Lemon test.  Under the Lemon test, a governmental practice violates the Establishment Clause if it: (1) lacks a legitimate secular purpose; (2) has the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion; or (3) fosters an excessive entanglement with religion.  The plaintiffs did not argue that the district had an illegitimate purpose.  Therefore, the court examined only the effect of using the church for graduation ceremonies and the degree of entanglement between the district and the church.  The court held that the district's use of the church did not have the primary effect of advancing religion because the district in no way associated itself with the symbols or beliefs expressed by the church and did not incorporate religion into the ceremony.  In fact, the district asked the church to remove all non-permanent religious symbols in an effort to minimize the religious nature of the setting.  Finally, the court determined that the minimal discussions between the district and church officials involved in renting and setting up the church for graduation did not constitute excessive entanglement.

This case does not give school districts absolute freedom to use places of worship for graduation ceremonies.  The 7^th Circuit stated that it will look at these issues on a case-by-case basis.