LUND v. ROWAN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

No. 15-1591.

837 F.3d 407 (2016)

Nancy LUND; Liesa Montag-Siegel; Robert Voelker, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ROWAN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant-Appellant. State of West Virginia; State of Alabama; State of Arizona; State of Arkansas; State of Florida; State of Indiana; State of Michigan; State of Nebraska; State of Nevada; State of Ohio; State of Oklahoma; State of South Carolina; State of Texas; Members of Congress, Amici Supporting Appellant, Americans United for Separation of Church and State; American Humanist Association; Anti-Defamation League; Center for Inquiry; Freedom from Religion Foundation; Interfaith Alliance Foundation; Sikh Coalition; Union for Reform Judaism; Women of Reform Judaism, Amici Supporting Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided: September 19, 2016.

Amended: September 21, 2016.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

ARGUED: Allyson Newton Ho , Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Dallas, Texas, for Appellant. Christopher Anderson Brook , American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: David C. Gibbs, III , The National Center for Life and Liberty, Flower Mound, Texas; John C. Sullivan , Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Dallas, Texas; David A. Coriman , Brett B. Harvey , Alliance Defending Freedom, Scottsdale, Arizona; Hiram S. Sasser, III , Liberty Institute, Plano, Texas, for Appellant. Daniel Mach , Heather L. Weaver , American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Patrick Morrisey , Attorney General, Elbert Lin , Solicitor General, Julie Marie Blake , Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General Of West Virginia, Charleston, West Virginia, for Amicus State of West Virginia; Luther Strange , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Alabama, Montgomery, Alabama, for Amicus State of Alabama; Mark Brnovich , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, for Amicus State of Arizona; Leslie Rutledge , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Arkansas, Little Rock, Arkansas, for Amicus State of Arkansas; Pamela Jo Bondi , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Florida, Tallahassee, Florida, for Amicus State of Florida; Gregory F. Zoeller , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Amicus State of Indiana; Bill Schuette , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, for Amicus State of Michigan; Douglas J. Peterson , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, for Amicus State of Nebraska; Adam Paul Laxalt , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Nevada, Carson City, Nevada, for Amicus State of Nevada; Michael DeWine , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio, for Amicus State of Ohio; E. Scott Pruitt , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for Amicus State of Oklahoma; Alan Wilson , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Amicus State of South Carolina; Ken Paxton , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Austin, Texas, for Amicus State of Texas. Sean Sandoloski , Dallas, Texas, Thomas G. Hungar , Alex Gesch , Lindsay S. See , Russell Balikian , Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amici Members of Congress. Richard B. Katskee , Gregory M. Lipper , Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Washington, D.C., for Amici Americans United for Separation of Church and State, American Humanist Association, Anti-Defamation League, Center for Inquiry, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, Sikh Coalition, Union for Reform Judaism, and Women of Reform Judaism.

Reversed and remanded with directions by published opinion. Judge Agee wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge Shedd concurs. Judge Wilkinson wrote a dissenting opinion.


The Board of Commissioners of Rowan County, North Carolina, ("the Board") opens its public meetings with an invocation delivered by a member of the Board. The district court determined that practice violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Under the Supreme Court's most recent decision explaining legislative...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases