Shurtleff v. Boston
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Shurtleff v. Boston and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Shurtleff v. Boston.
The Supreme Court reviewed whether Boston's flag-raising program at City Hall Plaza constituted government speech or private expression. The case arose when Boston denied a request to raise a Christian flag, citing Establishment Clause concerns. The Court found that Boston's lack of control over the flag's content indicated the program was private speech, not government speech.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Shurtleff v. Boston.
The Court held that Boston's flag-raising program did not express government speech, and denying the petitioners' flag violated the Free Speech Clause.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Shurtleff v. Boston. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Shurtleff v. Boston
The case centers on whether Boston's refusal to allow the Christian flag to be raised constitutes a violation of the Free Speech Clause.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Boston's refusal to let them raise their flag violated, among other things, the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause.
-
Why Establishment of Religion is relevant to Shurtleff v. Boston
Boston's decision was influenced by concerns about violating the Establishment Clause, which relates to government endorsement of religion.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The commissioner of Boston's Property Management Department worried that flying a religious flag at City Hall could violate the Establishment Clause.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Shurtleff v. Boston that support the summary and concepts above.
Boston's refusal to let petitioners fly their flag violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Boston's lack of meaningful involvement in the selection of flags or the crafting of their messages leads the Court to class the third-party flag raisings as private, not government, speech.
Boston's refusal to allow petitioners to raise their flag because of its religious viewpoint violated the Free Speech Clause.
