I offer a brief update on “Westphal v. Wagner,” our celebrated case against (some) prayers—in violation of the 1st Amendment’s “establishment clause”—at the SOCCCD:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
|A "heathen," evidently|
Plaintiffs (that’s us!) have filed a Motion of Summary Judgment on the religious-purpose prong of the Lemon test (the government's action must have a secular purpose, etc.). We’ve also filed a Motion to Amend that Order, asking for clarification re relief, etc.
Meanwhile, defendants (i.e., Wagner, Mathur, et al.) filed a Motion for Judgment, arguing against the Court’s decision to deny them summary judgment “on the religious-purpose prong.”
Don’t try to make sense of that language. The verbiage in the brief (below) makes the issue at hand clear:
(Click on these graphics BELOW to enlarge them. They should be readable then.)