A Peoria Unified School District governing board member in Arizona has filed a lawsuit in federal court accusing district officials of violating her civil rights by denying her freedom to quote Bible verses during board meetings.
The Christian conservative nonprofit First Liberty Institute filed the complaint in U.S. District Court in Tucson on behalf of Heather Rooks on Sept. 26.
The suit names the Peoria Unified School District as the defendant in the case.
It claims, among other things, that district officials violated Ms. Rooks’s right to freedom of speech and religion under the United States and Arizona constitutions by claiming her quoting of scripture was unlawful.
A Bible sits placed behind a chair in Iglesia Cristiana Bethel, in Tijuana, Mex., on Feb. 5, 2022. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)
At least one secular political action group threatened to sue the district if Ms. Rooks did not cease reading Bible passages during the public comment at board meetings.
The 28-page complaint filed by Ms. Rooks argues that legal and historical precedent and constitutional authority guarantee her the ability to openly and freely quote from The Bible.
“Heather Rooks isn’t a famous historical figure or a household name,” the suit states, “but she too wants to be part of the longstanding tradition of government officials solemnizing public occasions in this way.”
“After all, the current U.S. president, the first U.S. president, and an unbroken chain of U.S. officials in between have quoted scripture to solemnize official occasions or speeches, encourage their fellow citizens, and fortify themselves to carry out their official duties.”
“There is nothing unlawful about Rooks doing likewise.”
A mother of four children in district schools, Ms. Rooks won election to the five-member district governing board in 2022.
The governing board meets twice monthly to discuss and take action on policies and procedures affecting 36,000 students in 42 schools.
When Ms. Rooks took office in January, she immediately began opening the public comment during board meetings with a brief quote from Scripture.
Legal Dispute
The suit states that Ms. Rooks’s comments made her a target of secular activist groups, claiming her quoting religious verse was unlawful under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The Establishment Clause is a legal safeguard against the religious overreach of government and political influence over religion.
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts (2nd L) administers the oath of office to U.S. President Donald Trump (L) as his wife Melania Trump (3rd L) holds The Bible and son Barron Trump looks on, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 20, 2017. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
“To vindicate her statutory and constitutional rights as a board member and citizen, [Ms.] Rooks respectfully brings this action to declare those rights—and to dispel the confusion that regrettably clouded a practice as old as the Republic itself.”
On Jan. 12, Ms. Rooks recited a verse from Joshua 1:9.
“Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go.”
She recited excerpts from Isaiah 41:10, Proverbs 22:6, Corinthians 16:13, and other Bible passages at subsequent meetings.
After the board met on Feb. 9, Secular Communities for Arizona—an activist group advocating for the separation of church and state—issued a complaint accusing Ms. Rooks of ”unconstitutional proselytizing” by quoting scripture.
The group also claimed that doing so violated the Establishment Clause, including the state constitution and the board’s operation goals.
The suit states that the district board’s legal counsel, Lisa Anne Smith, emailed board members advising they couldn’t legally pray or recite scripture during board meetings.
A man reads a Bible passage during a service commemorating the victims of Maui’s wildfires in Kihei, Maui, on Aug. 13, 2023. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)
Board executive assistant Kimberly Kontra then sent members an email summarizing Ms. Smith’s legal guidance.
“Board member acting in their role as such should not read scripture during a board meeting, as it violates the Establishment Clause. Legal counsel also stated that the First Amendment is not applicable in this situation, as one is speaking as a member of the public governing body, not an individual.”
At a board meeting on March 1, Ms. Rooks sought clarification from then-district Superintendent Jason Reynolds about the district attorney’s legal opinion.
Mr. Reynolds followed up with a memo to board members affirming the legal opinion, and at the board’s March 9 meeting, Ms. Rooks stood her ground by reciting Corinthians 16:13: “Stay awake, stand firm in your faith, be brave, be strong.”
On May 25, a staff attorney representing the national secular activist group Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to the board claiming Ms. Rooks was using her position as a personal pulpit for religious indoctrination.
Police arrest Marcus Schroeder after he used a microphone to read The Bible in protest against a “child-friendly” drag event in Watertown, Wis., on July 29, 2023. (Courtesy of Marcus Schroeder)
The organization urged the district to take whatever action was necessary to resolve the matter under threat of “unnecessary liability and potential financial strain,” the lawsuit adds.
At a meeting on July 13, Ms. Rooks agreed to refrain from reciting Bible verses “at this time and will have my attorneys at First Liberty Institute handle this matter.”
Under threat of lawsuits and official reprisals, the suit states Ms. Rooks seeks a “judicial determination of her rights” as an elected board member.
‘Absolute Immunity’
The suit asserts that the U.S. Constitution guarantees Ms. Rooks “absolute legislative immunity for statements made at public meetings,” acknowledging that no violation of the Establishment Clause occurred.
Ms. Rooks “doesn’t coerce or call for anyone else’s participation. She doesn’t ask for anyone to bow their heads, stand, or participate in reading,” the suit states.
It adds that quoting Bible verses is “perfectly consistent” with the Establishment Clause, and to deny her that right violated the state and federal constitutions.
The suit asks the court to declare Ms. Rooks entitled to “absolute legislative immunity” for reciting Bible verses during board comments. It seeks an award of “nominal damages” for past violations of her civil rights.
The Epoch Times could not immediately reach First Liberty Attorney Andrew Gould and the district’s legal firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Texas for comment for this story.
Dangerous precedent for the freedom of religious expression in our society,” the lawsuit states.
Political climate can often be divisive and contentious, and Ms. Rooks believes that quoting scripture can bring a sense of unity and moral guidance to the proceedings.”
According to the lawsuit, Ms. Rooks began quoting Bible verses during the public comment portion of board meetings in February 2022. She felt that the verses provided inspiration and guidance for the discussions and decisions being made by the board. However, in July 2022, she received a letter from the district’s attorney stating that her quoting of scripture was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from promoting or favoring any religion.
Ms. Rooks asserts that her quoting of scripture is not an endorsement or promotion of any specific religion, but rather an expression of her own religious beliefs and values. She argues that her freedom of speech and religion are protected under the United States and Arizona constitutions, and that the district’s actions in prohibiting her from quoting Bible verses infringe upon her civil rights.
The suit also alleges that the district’s prohibition is a form of viewpoint discrimination, as it allows other individuals to express their beliefs during public comment but specifically targets Ms. Rooks’s religious expression. It claims that district officials have engaged in selective enforcement of their policies, allowing secular and non-religious expressions while censoring religious ones.
Furthermore, the lawsuit argues that there is a long history of government officials invoking religious texts during public ceremonies and events, including presidential inaugurations, swearing-in ceremonies, and legislative sessions. It contends that quoting scripture has become a tradition and a way for elected officials to acknowledge the moral foundations upon which our society is built.
“Denying Ms. Rooks the ability to quote Bible verses during board meetings not only infringes upon her individual rights, but also sets a
Now loading...