When the government is speaking for itself, it is immune from First Amendment scrutiny. 20-1800, was whether the city had created a public forum by allowing private groups to use its flagpole or was conveying its own speech by choosing and endorsing the flags it approved.

Breyer, writing for six members of the court, said the central question in the case, Shurtleff v. It rejected only one, from Camp Constitution, which says it seeks “to enhance understanding of our Judeo-Christian moral heritage.” The group’s application said it sought to raise a “Christian flag” for one hour at an event that would include “short speeches by some local clergy focusing on Boston’s history.” The flag bore the Latin cross. In a 12-year period, the city approved 284 requests to raise flags on the third flagpole. One of the three flagpoles in front of the building, which ordinarily flies the flag of Boston, is occasionally made available to groups seeking to celebrate their backgrounds or to promote causes like gay pride. WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Monday that the City of Boston had violated the First Amendment when it refused to let a private group raise a Christian flag in front of its City Hall.