A Maryland county council has discontinued its long-time tradition of beginning meetings by reciting the Lord’s Prayer after receiving warning letters to stop the practice from the atheist activist group Freedom from Religion Foundation. But legal experts say that the county council is well within its constitutional rights to continue the practice.

As reported by the Salisbury Independent on Monday, the Wicomico County Council is now considering different ways to open its meetings, including “holding a moment of silence, hosting a clergy-led prayer or letting Wicomico County voters decide through a referendum…” During a January 20 legislative meeting, Council President John Cannon noted that there has been “a great deal of disappointment” surrounding the decision, and that he “share[d] in that disappointment.”

The council recently received “multiple letters threatening litigation, including three letters of demand” from the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), which describes itself as an organization whose purpose is to “promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.”

“It’s a decision that unfortunately ends a long-standing tradition; one I’ve been honored to represent for about 20 years,” Cannon continued. “[Fellow councilman] Joe Holloway’s been here for those 20 years with me, and it’s one that existed well before our time in office. For many years, this practice took place without any controversy.”

Cannon went on to relate that “we are not a council that shies away from a challenge simply because litigation is threatened. But when legal counsel is clear about the probable outcome, when the financial risk to our citizens is so substantial, we have a responsibility to weigh fiscal stewardship against our desire to preserve a tradition we’ve honored for so many years.”

But legal experts like David Cortman, who serves as senior counsel and vice president of U.S. Litigation at Alliance Defending Freedom, say that the freedom to pray during public meetings has already been settled by legal precedent.

“What’s funny about this recent case [is that] it feels a little bit like a blast from the past,” he observed during “Washington Watch” Monday. “These issues have been … settled by the Supreme Court over a decade ago. In fact, it’s been four decades since the original case came up to the Supreme Court on legislative prayer. And basically, the court ruled that you can have legislative prayer. People talk about the Establishment Clause, the so-called separation of church and state, and what the Supreme Court said. You have to look at the history and tradition of our country, and these type of legislative prayers have been ongoing since, literally, [when] the First Amendment was passed. And Congress … hired a chaplain to engage in legislative prayers at the very beginning of our country, and so they’re permissible now.”

Cortman further explained that threats from leftist activists over the Establishment Clause’s supposed prohibition against prayer in government forums do not hold water.

“[T]he Establishment Clause, the separation of church and state, doesn’t carry what the Left wants it to carry,” he noted. “Groups like Freedom from Religion Foundation have been doing this sort of thing for decades now, where they send out these fear-mongering letters, they threaten litigation, they threaten attorney fees, and towns and counties just look at their budget and say, ‘Look, we’re already strapped. We don’t want to take the risk of having to pay out attorney fees.’”

Cortman continued, “The problem is … it’s certainly permissible to engage in a legislative prayer. There are several ways it can be done. The Supreme Court has talked about whether it’s before the meeting starts. You do your prayer, you do your pledge of allegiance, you open your meeting. Or they say often it’s actually for the legislators, the council members, the commission members themselves, and they could feel free to pray according to their religious tradition.”

Meanwhile, Wicomico County Council President John Cannon’s implication that the county would be unlikely to prevail in the courts of blue state Maryland should not deter it from pressing forward, Cortman argued.

“[S]ometimes the law is different in different areas of the country, but that’s why the Supreme Court is there to even all that out,” he emphasized. “… [F]ederal law, according to the Supreme Court, is uniform everywhere. So you may have recalcitrant courts that try to distinguish cases or draw the lines differently. But even if this case [went] all the way up to the Supreme Court again, [it] would certainly … bless this practice because it’s part of the tradition of our country going back to our Founders.”

As for what local government bodies should do if they receive similar warning letters threatening the right to public prayer, Cortman urged them not to be afraid of legal engagement.

“[T]hey need to engage a group like Alliance Defending Freedom who could give them legal advice on the exact issue,” he underscored. “I’ve seen these letters from Freedom from Religion Foundation literally for 30 years. … They threaten you with litigation and try to get towns and localities to stop doing whatever religious practice it happens to be. So they need to get advice from groups like ADF who do this sort of work and give them the advice and then hopefully make the decision to take a stand. Because if we don’t, what happens is that erodes religious freedom for all of us.”