On Monday, September 22, 2025, Raw Story reported that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh is facing scrutiny regarding a potential conflict of interest in an upcoming case concerning religious expression in public schools. The case, which the Supreme Court is considering, could potentially overturn a precedent established in 2000 regarding the restriction of religious expression at public school events.

The controversy stems from Kavanaugh’s involvement, as a private attorney, in a similar case roughly 25 years ago. Constitutional attorney Andrew Seidel has argued that this prior involvement constitutes a “blatant conflict of interest,” potentially requiring Kavanaugh to recuse himself from the upcoming case.

The case under consideration involves a private Christian school in Florida that sued the Florida High School Athletic Association in 2016. The lawsuit was filed after the athletic association prohibited the school from broadcasting a prayer over the loudspeakers at a public high school football game. The private school is seeking to overturn the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, a case from 2000.

Seidel, in an analysis published in Rolling Stone, contends that federal law mandates Kavanaugh’s recusal due to his previous involvement.

As a private attorney at Kirkland & Ellis in late 1999, Kavanaugh filed a legal brief on behalf of the private Christian school, arguing that restricting religious expression in public schools equated to “the full extermination of private religious speech from the public schools.”

Seidel argues that Kavanaugh’s stance in the original case leaves little doubt about how he would rule in the new case. He asserts that Kavanaugh’s impartiality is reasonably in question as the court decides whether to take up the case and rule again on the constitutionality of prayer in public schools.

Federal law stipulates that Supreme Court members must recuse themselves from cases when their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The Supreme Court Code of Conduct also mandates recusal when an unbiased and reasonable person, aware of all relevant circumstances, would doubt the justice’s ability to fairly discharge their duties.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to discuss whether to take up the case during a closed-door meeting on September 29. If the court decides to hear the case, arguments from both sides could begin as early as October.

 

 

Source: Raw Story