The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Monday an appeal by families of two students slain during the 1999 Columbine High School massacre arguing that officials violated their constitutional free-speech rights by refusing to display ceramic tiles with religious messages.
The messages, painted on tiles as part of an on-campus memorial, contained messages such as "God is Love" and "4/20/99 Jesus Wept," referring to the date that students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold fatally wounded 12 fellow students and a teacher before killing themselves.
The glazed tiles, created by students, teachers, Columbine families, rescue workers and others, were part of an effort to assist in the school community's psychological healing from the shooting rampage.
The 4-inch-by-4-inch tiles were part of a project to renovate the Colorado school. About 2,100 tiles were put up in the school's hallways, but some 80 or 90 had to be removed, including the two at issue in the case.
The justices let stand a U.S. appeals court ruling that the ban on religious symbols was reasonably related to the legitimate goal by officials of preventing disruptive religious debate on the school's walls.
TILES REMEMBER SLAIN STUDENTS
The parents of Daniel Rohrbough and Kelly Fleming, two students who were shot to death, painted the messages on two tiles in remembrance of their children.
The Denver-based appeals court reversed a federal judge's ruling that the decision to bar the religious tiles violated the families' free-speech rights under the First Amendment.
The appeals court ruled the tiles amounted to "school-sponsored speech" and agreed with administrators that the tiles would violate the constitutionally required separation of church and state.
Attorneys for the families appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that high court precedents have held that the First Amendment forbids government officials from suppressing ideas simply because they might cause controversy or offense.
They said the appeals court ruling allowed "viewpoint-based discrimination" and the suppression of religious expression.
Attorneys for the school district urged the appeal be denied, saying the decisions made were "reasonable and legitimate." They added, "Difficult decisions cannot, and do not, satisfy everyone.