Prayer Circle

He lost a seminal ruling; now the Supreme Court is revisiting the precedent.

, The National Law Journal


In 1983, in one of his many causes, Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers strenuously argued before his colleagues and then through the federal courts that nothing religious in nature should transpire on the legislative floor. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with him in the case that bears his name: Marsh v. Chambers. Thirty years later, the Roberts Court is being asked to take that decision upholding legislative prayers a step further in one of the new term's potentially biggest cases.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202616494934

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.