Bronze Statue Controversy in Massachusetts

A city in the Boston area of Massachusetts is planning to place a significant 10-foot bronze statue outside its new public safety headquarters to pay tribute to local police and firefighters.

However, this plan has stirred controversy due to the religious significance attributed to the statues; one shows the Archangel Michael overcoming the devil, while the other represents Florian, an early Christian firefighter. This has drawn the attention of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a group of secular activists, leading to a lawsuit that halted the installation last May.

The ACLU argued that having the two statues as the only adornments on the building’s façade “undermines Quincy’s religious pluralism and violates the Massachusetts Constitution’s long-standing requirement that government remain neutral in religious matters.” They have consistently pushed against this public installation.

“Let’s salute our firefighters and police in Quincy,” commented a local supporter.

The legal dispute eventually reached the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which is set to hear oral arguments on this case, Fitzmaurice v. City of Quincy, this Wednesday.

In defense, the city’s brief contends that symbols on government property shouldn’t be deemed “illegal simply because some citizens perceive them to have religious meaning.” Interestingly, several justices seemed skeptical about the city’s arguments, especially in light of Quincy’s existing public art that includes various religiously significant figures, like multiple statues of Moses.

Contrary to the ACLU’s stance, many groups, including prominent fire and police unions, religious organizations, and noted legal scholars, have rallied behind the statues. They argue that public art shouldn’t be restricted just because it might evoke religious thoughts in some individuals.

• Some judges raised concerns that legal actions like the ACLU’s might essentially function as a “heckler’s veto,” potentially becoming a troubling norm.
• They suggested that the plaintiffs might be asking the court to “provide less protection than the Supreme Court for free exercise” or to “tolerate more hostility to religion than the Supreme Court would allow.”
• Moreover, the claim that the statues favor a specific religion was challenged, especially given Florian’s historical significance and Archangel Michael’s role across various faiths and cultures.

Tom Bowes, the president of the Quincy Fire Department Local 792, emphasized the impact of Florian’s legacy on generations of first responders. “We hope the court will allow Quincy to honor that tradition,” he remarked.

Joseph Davis, a senior advisor at the Beckett Fund for Religious Freedom, echoed these sentiments, asserting that public art should not be censored due to potential religious connotations.

Beckett’s attorney, Eric Rathbach, commented that the ACLU’s argument rests on an outdated legal standard known as the Lemon test which, he contends, has been rendered irrelevant by the Supreme Court in recent rulings. The precedent set in cases like American Legion v. American Humanist Association clarified that the First Amendment does not necessitate the removal of all religious symbols from public spaces.

In previous decisions, lower courts had used this often-criticized standard, including in Quincy, leading to concerns about Massachusetts potentially reestablishing a test that has been largely discredited at the federal level.

The court’s decision is anticipated this fall.