Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf
Page Number: 59.0

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

19 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

degree there was one) as erasing years of prior actions by
Kennedy.

Like the policy change in Santa Fe, Kennedy’s “changed”
prayers at these last three games were a clear continuation
of a “long-established tradition of sanctioning” school offi-
cial involvement in student prayers.  Ibid.  Students at the 
three  games  following  Kennedy’s  changed  practice  wit-
nessed Kennedy kneeling at the same time and place where 
he had led them in prayer for years.  They witnessed their
peers  from  opposing  teams  joining  Kennedy,  just  as  they
had when Kennedy was leading joint team prayers.  They
witnessed members of the public and state representatives 
going  onto  the  field  to  support  Kennedy’s  cause  and  pray 
with him.  Kennedy did nothing to stop this unauthorized 
access to the field, a clear dereliction of his duties.  The BHS 
players  in  fact  joined  the  crowd  around  Kennedy  after  he 
stood up from praying at the last game.  That BHS students 
did not join Kennedy in these last three specific prayers did 
not  make  those  events  compliant  with  the  Establishment 
Clause.  The coercion to do so was evident.  Kennedy him-
self apparently anticipated that his continued prayer prac-
tice would draw student participation, requesting that the 
District  agree  that  it  would  not  “interfere”  with  students
joining him in the future.  App. 71.

Finally,  Kennedy  stresses  that  he  never  formally  re-
quired  students  to  join  him  in  his  prayers.    But  existing
precedents  do  not  require  coercion  to  be  explicit,  particu-
larly  when  children  are  involved.    To  the  contrary,  this 
Court’s  Establishment  Clause  jurisprudence  establishes 
that “ ‘the government may no more use social pressure to 
enforce  orthodoxy  than  it  may  use  more  direct  means.’ ”  
Santa Fe, 530 U. S., at 312.  Thus, the Court has held that 
the Establishment Clause “will not permit” a school “ ‘to ex-
act religious conformity from a student as the price’ of join-
ing  her  classmates  at  a  varsity  football  game.”    Ibid.  To 
uphold a coach’s integration of prayer into the ceremony of