Look Who it Was Random video

Update: Judge Denies Prayer Injunction for Hamilton Commission

103 views · Published 31 August 2012 · 2:25 · Indexed 25 October 2026

Channel: WTVC NewsChannel 9 · 2012 · News & Politics

Watch on YouTube

by John Madewell  The Hamilton County Commission will be allowed to continue with prayers before its official meetings.Judge Sandy Mattice has denied a temporary injunction on prayer before Hamilton County Commission meetings.Supporters applauded the ruling.The suit was brought by Chattanooga men Tommy Coleman and Brandon Jones. They plan to appeal the decision. Early this afternoon, Coleman told NewsChannel 9, "The appeal process started a few hours ago, Attorney (Robin) Flores is in the process right now of working up an appeal. We plan to appeal immediately."Because litigation is pending, county leaders have remained quiet. The Alliance Defending Freedom is representing the county. Attorney Bryan Beauman is with that organization. "American founders opened public meetings with prayer and public officials today should be able to do the same. And in this case, in this ruling, it is exactly what the court recognized," Beauman said,In his 37 page order, Judge Mattice wrote that the prayer policy adopted by the Hamilton County Commission on July 3, "strives for neutrality." His order notes the county went with the option "authorizing some denominational prayer while taking care to ensure that its public recitation does not proselytize listeners, advance one religion or disparage another, or otherwise affiliate the government with any specific faith."The judge pointed out that the policy does not require participation by either commissioners or members of the audience, and that all congregations represented in Hamilton County may participate.CLICK HERE TO READ THE JUDGE'S ORDER (pdf)Although the ruling said the plaintiff's had not demonstrated they are  "likely to suffer irreparable harm before a decision on the merits can be reached," Coleman disagreed. "I thought it was clear that being told that I was a sinful person, which was done after the policy was accepted, that's harmful to me. I don't believe a government body should invite someone to create a policy to protect an attack on me."Meanwhile, one of the attorneys for the Alliance Defending Freedom said this case differs from other public faith challenges. Beauman said, "It's very difficult to take a ruling based on a Ten Commandments display or a prayer in a school context and apply that to a prayer in a legislative setting. And that is, in essence, what the court spent a lot of time addressing."

More from this channel