In Cambridge Christian School, Inc. v. Florida High School Athletic Association, Inc., 22-11222 (11th Cir. Sept. 3, 2024), a Free Exercise case brought on behalf of a Christian-school football team, the panel holds that the plaintiff had no standing for declaratory or injunctive relief to use the stadium public-address system for group prayer, where it failed to show there it was a likelihood that it would return to championship play.
“Cambridge Christian is a private Christian school in Tampa, Florida. In 2015, after a successful regular season and playoff run, its high school football team (aka The Lancers) made it to the FHSAA state championship game. Leading up to that game, Cambridge Christian asked the FHSAA for permission to use the stadium’s public address system for a prayer before the game. The FHSAA denied permission. Cambridge Christian filed this lawsuit claiming, among other things, violations of its rights under the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
While the case was pending on appeal, in 2023, “the Florida legislature passed House Bill 225 [codified as Fla. Stat. § 1006.185], which required the FHSAA to ‘adopt bylaws, policies, or procedures that provide each school participating in a high school championship contest or series of contests under the direction and supervision of the association the opportunity to make brief opening remarks, if requested by the school, using the public address system at the event.’”
The Eleventh Circuit affirms summary judgment to the defendant athletic association on the merits. It detours briefly, though, to address whether the plaintiff school’s claim for prospective relief was either lacking in standing or moot. The panel holds that under either theory, it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to address those claims for relief.
Under the rubric of standing, first, the panel holds that the plaintiff failed to establish a likelihood that its team would return to championship play. The panel allows that a team bound for the championship would have standing to challenge the policy against prayers over the PA system. “But only, we would add, if it wins all of its playoff games leading to the state championship game, the final one.”
“Here’s the problem with Cambridge Christian’s position. Its football team has not returned to the FHSAA state championship since 2015. In fact, 2015 is the only year the team has ever made it to the state championship since the school started its football program in 2003. Only once in two decades.”
There is no “substantial risk” of harm where it is only speculative that the team will return to the championship. “[G]iven the Lancers’ past performance on the gridiron, it cannot meet that standard. All the more so because as Cambridge Christian admits, the ‘competitiveness’ of its football team ‘has waned’ over the last few seasons, and the team is now in what it calls a ‘rebuilding phase’ that it expects to last for a ‘few years.’ Hope springs eternal but standing cannot be built on hope. With all due respect to the Cambridge Christian Fighting Lancers, there’s nothing to suggest that the team’s participation in a future football state championship is imminent or even likely.”
“[F]or Cambridge Christian to be subject to the challenged policy, it must win a specified series of football games, a task it has not been able to accomplish since 2015. While the school might be ‘ready’ to compete in the state championship game if it ever gets to one again, it is not ‘able to get to one without first clearing the many regular season and playoff hurdles that it has not been ‘able’ to clear in the past eight years.”
Moreover, the panel also holds that the claim for prospective relief is moot in view of the passage of House Bill 225. “Based on Fla. Stat. § 1006.185 and the FHSAA’s corresponding policy, which authorize pregame access to the PA system at state championship events for brief comments, it’s clear that the school won’t be subjected to the PA system prayer ban at future state championship football games, even if does return to FHSAA football . . . . After the passage of Fla. Stat. § 1006.185, it appears that access has been made equally available to all speakers, religious and secular.”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 