Opening Your Meeting: Prayers, Pledges, and Land Acknowledgements

Opening a public meeting sets the tone for what is to follow. Local government governing bodies in Washington have a range of options for how they do this; some open with prayers or invocations, some recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and some say land acknowledgments.

None of these options is required or forbidden by law, but each comes with its own legal considerations. This blog provides an overview of all three types of meeting openers.

Prayers and Invocations

Opening a public meeting with a prayer or invocation is a common but also a legally permissible practice. The U.S. Supreme Court addressed this directly in Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014), ruling that legislative prayer does not violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 

The invocation itself does not need to be nondenominational, but the opportunity to give it must be open to all faiths, and no particular religion may be advanced or disparaged. See, for example, Clark County’s open invite to local clerics from all faiths to deliver invocations at county council meetings.

If a governing body chooses to include an invocation at its meetings, the following practices are recommended:

• The body should adopt a written non-discrimination policy making clear that the opportunity to deliver the invocation is open to any faith tradition.
• There should be no advanced review or approval of the content of an invocation.
• Attendance at the invocation must remain voluntary. Members of the public should be free to arrive late, step out, or remain silent without consequence.
• Legal counsel should review any invocation policy before it is adopted.

Below are a few sample policies related to the inclusion and practice of opening local meetings with invocations:

• Clark County Resolution No. 2017-08-11 (2017)
• Oak Harbor Resolution 13-06 (2013)
• Washougal Resolution 1095 (2014)

The Pledge of Allegiance

There is no state or federal law requiring local government legislative bodies to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings. If a body has already adopted rules governing the recitation of the pledge at a meeting, those rules should be followed. If not, the body may establish its own practice by policy or rule.

In the past, MRSC has been asked if members of the public, or even members of the governing body, can be required to participate in the recitation of the pledge.

The answer is no: participation cannot be compelled. The U.S. Supreme Court established this principle in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), holding that students could not be required to recite the pledge. That same year, in Bolling v. Superior Court for Clallam County, the Washington Supreme Court struck down a requirement that children recite the pledge at school. The state court did not prohibit reciting the pledge at public events, only mandatory participation. The same principle applies at a local government meeting: no elected official or member of the public can be required to participate in reciting the pledge.

MRSC has also received inquiries from local governments asking whether the governing body should remind attendees that participation is voluntary before reciting the pledge. Including such a reminder or merely inviting attendees to participate in the recitation is a reasonable practice.

Land Acknowledgments

A land acknowledgment is a formal statement that recognizes Indigenous Peoples as the “original stewards of the lands where an event or organization is located,” according to Washington Tribes. There is no state or federal law requiring local government legislative bodies to recite these statements, but they are protected by the same First Amendment rights that allow public prayer and recitation of the pledge.

Tribal leaders and Indigenous organizations note that a land acknowledgment is most meaningful when developed in direct partnership with local tribes and accompanied by ongoing, concrete action.

Several Washington cities have adopted formal land acknowledgments, including Edmonds and Spokane (see Resolution 2021-0019).

Kirkland’s statement was developed in direct consultation with representatives of the Duwamish, Muckleshoot, Snoqualmie, and Suquamish Tribes and may serve as a useful reference for other agencies considering a similar step.

The Bottom Line

Deciding whether to open a meeting with an invocation, pledge, land acknowledgment, a combination of the three, or none of these is a matter of local discretion. If your agency decides to incorporate one or more of these into your public meetings, follow the best practices discussed above. These include developing policies that integrate the action into meeting procedures, opening the opportunity to contribute to all faiths, and ensuring participation is voluntary.