The Economist - UK (2022-04-30)

The Economist April 30th 2022 United States 35

E

veninacityascongestedasChicago,

trafficjamsrarelyformatseven

o’clockinthemorningona Saturday.At

thattimeonApril23rd,however,there

werealreadyover 300 carsqueuing

outsidea branchofbpinEastGarfield

Park.Theystretchedfromthepetrol­

stationforecourtaroundanentirecity

block.Driverssatintheircars,which

rangedfrombatteredToyotastonew

RangeRovers,waitingtopullinfor$50

worthoffreepetrolcourtesyofWillie

Wilson,a Chicagomillionairewhois

standingformayoragainnextyear.

Thoseatthefrontofthequeuehadar­

rivedat4am.

Thegiveaway,whichalsotookplace

at 15 otherplacesinthecityand11 inthe

suburbs,wasMrWilson’sthirdintwo

months.Hehasspentsome$2.2m,most­

lyinmajority­blackneighbourhoods,

buyingpeoplepetrol.“It’sa gooduseof

thedollartohelpa lotoffamilies,”he

toldtheChicagoSunTimes.

Thatseemsquestionable.Overa

quarterofChicagohouseholds,and

highersharesofthepoorest,donotown

cars.Andthecityisalreadychokedwith

traffictoomuchofthetime.Still,Mr

Wilson’slargesseispopular.“It’sa good

lookforChicago,”saidDavidJones,

queuingina ChevroletImpala,itswing

mirrorhangingoff.Therisingcostof

petrolisofparticularconcerninthe

neighbourhoodsMrWilsontargeted,

wherepublictransportisoftenpoor.

Willit helphimbecomemayor?Mr

Wilson,a 73­year­oldwhocametoChica­

gofromLouisianaasa childandmade

hismoneywitha McDonald’sfranchise

andthena medical­suppliescompany,is

unlikelytowintheelectionnextFebru­

ary.Buthissupportamongblackvoters

couldhurtLoriLightfoot,theincumbent.

In2015,whenMrWilsonlastran,hewon

just11%ofthevote,butfarmoreinthe

blackwardswhichMsLightfootwill

needif sheistowinagain.

Sheisclearlyrattled.OnApril27th

shepersuadedthecitycounciltoap­

provea plantodistribute50,000pre­

paidcardsforpetrolandpublictrans­

port,ata costof$12.5m.Votersmaynot

beimpressed.“She’susingthecity’s

money,he’susinghisownmoney,”notes

DerrickOrr,a schoolprincipalwaitingin

hisRangeRoverandfullofpraiseforMr

Wilson.Thecityneedsotherstuffmore

urgentlythanfreepetrol,heargues.But

it ishardfora cash­strappedpoliticianto

fighta manhandingoutfreebies.

Freepetrol

Tank warfare

C HICAGO

AChicagomillionaireopenshiswallettochallengethemayor

Landofthefreebie

Faithandfreedom

An almighty win?

A

merica’sconstitutionpromisesthe
“free  exercise”  of  religion;  it  also  pro­
hibits  religious  “establishment”.  Recently
the Supreme Court has been strengthening
the  first  guarantee—a  right  to  live  one’s
faith  free  from  government  meddling—
while chipping away at the wall separating
church  from  state.  The  divergent  trend
lines of these First Amendment guarantees
are  unlikely  to  converge  in  the  case  of  Jo­
seph  Kennedy,  a  devout  Christian  Ameri­
can­football coach who was suspended for
praying after games in Washington state. 
Kennedy v Bremerton School District,the
first  case  involving  prayer  and  public
schools to reach the high court since 2000,
is messy. The Supreme Court typically de­
cides on the law, not the facts; ascertaining
facts is the district court’s job. But on April
25th  factual  disputes  about  what  exactly
Mr Kennedy did and why he was suspend­
ed took centre stage in the oral argument. 
Paul Clement, the lawyer for Mr Kenne­
dy, claimed his client lost his job for priv­
ate,  “fleeting”  prayers  conducted  by  him­
self on the 50­yard line after two games in
October  2015.  Richard  Katskee,  represent­
ing the school board, told a different story:
Mr  Kennedy  had  been  praying  with  stu­
dents  since  he  started  coaching  in  2008.
Teachers  and  coaches  can  of  course  have
“quiet prayers by themselves at work even
if  students  can  see”,  Mr  Katskee  said,  but
Mr  Kennedy  made  himself  “the  centre  of
attention” during many midfield supplica­
tions and “pressured” students to pray. 
Justice Stephen Breyer laid out what he
took to be six facts. These included an un­
answered letter the district sent Mr Kenne­
dy  proposing  accommodations  for  him  to
pray less demonstratively. Mr Clement as­
sented to those, but said there were “lots of
other  facts  that  are  in  the  record  that  I
think are highly relevant”.
Justice  Samuel  Alito  urged  Mr  Katskee
to “forget about all of the complicated facts
in this case” and ponder whether a football
coach praying, without inviting or exclud­
ing  anyone,  risked  establishing  religion.
Chief  Justice  John  Roberts  asked  whether,
if Mr Kennedy’s politicisation of the issue
by inviting legislators to pray with him was
taken  “off  the  table”,  his  actions  would  be
kosher in the school board’s eyes.
In building its case against Mr Kennedy,
the  school  board  had  relied  on  the  “en­
dorsement  test”,  a  standard  first  used  by
Justice  Sandra  Day  O’Connor  in  1984

whereby  a  constitutional  violation  occurs

when  a  “reasonable  observer”  finds  the

government’s imprimatur on religious ex­

pression.  It has fallen out of favour among

the justices. As a lower­court judge in 2010,

Neil  Gorsuch  said  it  was  “far  from  clear”

the test remained an appropriate measure. 

Recognising this, Mr Katskee sought to

characterise  the  prayers  as  “coercive”—a

test  the  conservative  justices  are  less  sus­

picious of. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh pre­

sented the concerns in Kennedy as a depar­

ture from precedent. In contrast to the reli­

gious invocations at public­school gradua­

tions that the court found coercive inLee v

Weismanin 1992, he said, Kennedyinvolves

only “subtle” or “implicit” pressure.

The links between Leeand Kennedyare

stronger  than  Justice  Kavanaugh  lets  on:

both  ask  whether  youngsters  will  feel

pushed to take part in religious rituals they

don’t believe in. And there’s an extra incen­

tive for athletes, as one former Bremerton

student  attests.  Staying  on  the  coach’s

good  side  is  crucial  for  those  who  want

playing  time.  Participation  in  the  prayer

circles, the student said, is “expected”.

Four  justices  signalled  support  for  Mr

Kennedy  when  the  case  first  came  to  the

Supreme  Court  in  2019.  This  week  one  or

two more—Justice Amy Coney Barrett and

Chief Justice Roberts—sounded inclined to

join that quartet in pooh­poohing religion­

state separationinfavour of free religious

exercise. Mr Kennedy’s chances of redemp­

tion seem high.n

N EW YORK
The Supreme Court is poised to side
with a praying football coach