Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District

Following this ruling, Lamb's Church proceeded to take the case to the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the rulings of the lower courts were overturned. In essence, the Court ruled that the district did violate the chapel's freedom of speech by refusing their request to show movies on their property solely because the movies had a religious theme. It also stated that granting permission to the chapel would not have constituted the district's endorsement of the films since the films would not be sponsored by the school during school hours or closed to the general public. The district acted in violation of the Chapel's First Amendment rights. This was the Supreme Court's main reason for overturning the decisions of the lower courts.

Justice White wrote

. . . although a speaker may be excluded from a nonpublic forum if he wishes to address a topic not encompassed within the purpose of the forum . . . or if he is not a member of the class of speakers for whose special benefit the forum was created . . . , the government violates the First Amendment when it denies access to a speaker solely to suppress the point of view he espouses on an otherwise includible subject

In making their determination, the Court invoked the somewhat controversial Lemon Test. Even justices who agreed that the district was in error, were not comfortable with the strictness of the Lemon Test. Justice Scalia wrote

Like some ghoul in a late-night horror movie that repeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad, after being repeatedly killed and buried, Lemon stalks our Establishment Clause jurisprudence once again, frightening the little children and school attorneys of Center Moriches Union Free School District.

Right-wing Christian groups perceived the decision as a major victory. The Christian Science Monitor quoted Michael McConnell from the University of Chicago, whom they called "an expert on church-state relations," as saying "I don't think people realize how common it is for religious speakers to be suppressed in public schools. This decision says public spaces will not be treated as religion-free zones."

Still, the importance of the idea of separation of church and state was not overlooked in this ruling, as the Court drew fine lines between when and where the freedom of religious speech crosses the bounds of civic responsibility.