Judge dismisses Air Force Academy prayer lawsuit

DENVER (AP) - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit seeking to block a prayer luncheon at the Air Force Academy.

U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello ruled Wednesday in Denver. She says associate professor David Mullin and a watchdog group, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, didn't show they had legal standing to bring the suit.

They alleged the event violates the constitutional separation of church and state because it appears to be sponsored by the academy itself, and because Mullin and other faculty members believe they'll face retribution if they don't attend, even though it's officially voluntary.

Following the judge's ruling, the academy's chaplain agreed to make it clear at the start of the luncheon that it's an event sponsored by the chapel, not the academy as a whole.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

A government attorney told a federal judge on Wednesday that Air Force Academy educator and a religion watchdog group have no legal standing to challenge a prayer luncheon at the school.

Department of Justice attorney Brad Rosenberg said associate professor David Mullin and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation didn't meet the legal requirements to file their lawsuit seeking to block the luncheon, scheduled for Thursday.

Their suit alleges the event violates the constitutional separation of church and state because it appears to be sponsored by the academy itself and because Mullin and other faculty members believe they'll face retribution if they don't attend, even though it is officially voluntary.

Darold Killmer, who represents Mullin and the foundation, argued his clients are entitled to sue because Mullin has good reason to fear retribution and because the foundation is a civil rights group representing academy personnel who don't feel they can speak up.

U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello said she would rule later Wednesday on whether Mullin and the foundation have standing to sue. If she rules they do, she would then hear arguments on the merits of the lawsuit.

If she rules they don't have standing, the lawsuit is dismissed.

In his closing statement on the legal standing issue, Rosenberg said Mullin's fears of retribution were "entirely speculative" and that he didn't raise his concerns with the chain of command at the academy. Rosenberg quoted the academy superintendent, Lt. Gen. Michael Gould, as telling the faculty and cadets at a meeting that attendance was voluntary and that if anyone felt pressured to attend, they should report it.

"The government's position is that Mr. Mullin simply isn't a credible witness," Rosenberg said.

Killmer cited Mullin's testimony from Tuesday that he felt "excluded and ostracized" by the way they event was publicized, and that qualified him to file suit.

"If he doesn't have standing, I don't know who does," Kilmer said.

Killmer said the foundation qualifies to file suit because Mullin and others are clients of the group and because defending religious liberty is the group's core purpose.

Arguello heard more than six hours of argument and testimony, much of it contentious, over two days.

She and Killmer frequently sparred over whether his questions to witnesses were relevant, and Rosenberg often objected to Killmer's questions.

At one point, Killmer told the judge, "I'm being interrupted by groundless objections."

"I don't think they're groundless," Arguello said.