Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf
Page Number: 61.0

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

21 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer,
in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs 
through its employees” to determine whose interests should
prevail.  Pickering v. Board of Ed. of Township High School 
Dist. 205, Will Cty., 391 U. S. 563, 568 (1968).

As the Court of Appeals below outlined, the District has
a  strong  argument  that  Kennedy’s  speech,  formally  inte-
grated into the center of a District event, was speech in his
official capacity as an employee that is not entitled to First
Amendment protections at all.  See Garcetti, 547 U. S., at 
418; 991 F. 3d, at 1014–1016 (applying Garcetti).3  It is un-
necessary to resolve this question, however, because, even 
assuming  that  Kennedy’s  speech  was  in  his  capacity  as  a 
private citizen, the District’s responsibilities under the Es-
tablishment Clause provided “adequate justification” for re-
stricting it.  Garcetti, 547 U. S., at 418. 

Similarly, Kennedy’s free exercise claim must be consid-
ered in light of the fact that he is a school official and, as
such, his participation in religious exercise can create Es-
tablishment Clause conflicts.  Accordingly, his right to pray
at any time and in any manner he wishes while exercising 
his professional duties is not absolute.  See Lee, 505 U. S., 

—————— 

3 The  Court’s  primary  argument  that  Kennedy’s  speech  is  not  in  his 
official capacity is that he was permitted “to call home, check a text, [or]
socialize” during the time period in question.  Ante, at 18–19.  These truly
private,  informal  communications  bear  little  resemblance,  however,  to 
what Kennedy did.  Kennedy explicitly sought to make his demonstrative 
prayer a permanent ritual of the postgame events, at the physical center 
of those events, where he was present by virtue of his job responsibilities,
and after years of giving prayer-filled motivational speeches to students
at the same relative time and location.  In addition, Kennedy gathered
public officials and other members of the public onto the field to join him 
in the prayer, contrary to school policies controlling access to the field.
Such behavior raises an entirely different risk of depriving the employer 
of “control over what the employer itself has commissioned or created”
than an employee making a call home on the sidelines, fleetingly check-
ing email, or pausing to hug a friend in the crowd.  Garcetti, 547 U. S., at 
422.