The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority is being called out by the Archdiocese of Washington and Archbishop Cardinal Wuerl for allowing anti-religion advertisements on its vehicles – but refusing to let anything appear that may suggest faith.
For example, “three French hens” are just fine, but not “three wise men.”
And the Easter bunny is approved, but not an image of a cross.
Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative ran into a roadblock at the WMATA several years ago, and at the time alleged it was violating the First Amendment by refusing to run her political ad about radical Islamism.
It was at that time that WMATA made the announcement that it no longer would take any “issue-oriented advertising.”
Several years earlier, back in 2012, Geller won a similar lawsuit against the WMATA over an ad that portrayed Adolph Hitler and Haj Amin al-Husseini, alongside the text: “Staunch ally, the leader of the Muslim world.” The ad also contained the text: “Islamic Jew-Hatred: It’s in the Quran.”
The fight going on right now was triggered by a dispute over Christmas ads.
The bus company said advertising Santa Claus is fine, but not the Nativity.
“It accepts the three French hens, but not three wise men,” said Kelly Shackelford, of First Liberty.
That organization, and the Ethics and Public Policy Center, have filed a friend-of-the court brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington supporting the attempt by the archdiocese to convince the metro to allow faith references.
“Before Christmas, WMATA banned an advertisement from the archdiocese of Washington depicting images of shepherds and the URL ‘FindThePerfectGift.org’ on its metro trains and buses. The brief argues WMATA violated the U.S. Constitution,” First Liberty explains.
“WMATA prohibited the archdiocese’s advertisement not because it referred to Christmas, but because it sought to convey a religious viewpoint message emphasizing that Christ is the reason for the season,” said Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel to First Liberty. “What’s really shocking is that WMATA in this case said there were ‘two halves’ of Christmas, the religious half and the secular half. But only messages relating to the ‘secular half’ were welcome on their buses. Evidently, WMATA can now accept Christmas advertisements about Santa Clause, but rejects the nativity; it accepts the three French hens, but not three wise men.”
It was back in 2015, after it lost the first case, that WMATA adopted a new demand: “Advertisements that promote or oppose any religion, religious practice or belief are prohibited.”
But Shackelford says, “When the government rejects a message just because it conveys a religious point of view, it violates the First Amendment. Censoring all religious viewpoints should be an obvious violation of the First Amendment.”
The filing explains, “Some speech relating to religion is just fine with WMATA – whether it is the familiar red kettle of a religious charity or the mockery of religion in an award-winning musical. Ads relating to Christmas and Christmas gift giving are acceptable to WMATA if suffiently commercial in nature. But a simple message to ‘find the perfect gift’ is excluded…”
First Liberty warned of the wide-ranging consequences.
The archdiocese this year “will be looking at the Easter celebration in a whole new light” because it is banned from posting even a mild religious message.
“The Easter Bunny might be okay, but not anything suggesting faith,” First Liberty said.
