Mary Anne Sause, Petitioner v. Timothy J. Bauer, et al.

Mary Anne Sause said police officers violated her First Amendment rights by telling her to stop praying during an investigation at her apartment. In an unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court said her First Amendment claim needed further review instead of ending on the lower court's existing analysis.

The Court issued a per curiam (unsigned) opinion on June 28, 2018. The prompt does not provide a vote count or a justice-by-justice lineup.

“"The centerpiece of her complaint was the allegation that two of the town’s police officers visited her apartment," and the case concerned "Sause’s rights under the First Amendment."”

The case matters for people who pray or engage in other religious activity during police encounters, and for officers deciding what orders they can lawfully give. For example, it affects whether an officer can interrupt a person's prayer and still avoid liability under qualified immunity (a rule that can shield officers from damages).

The Supreme Court has finished its part of this docket action. The practical next step was for the lower courts to apply the Supreme Court's instructions to Sause's First Amendment claim.

The dispute was whether officers violated Mary Anne Sause's First Amendment rights by telling her to stop praying during an investigation. The case also involved qualified immunity.

It affects how police handle religious activity during encounters with the public. It also matters to people seeking damages when officers allegedly interfere with prayer.

The Supreme Court finished its work on this case. The lower courts then had to revisit the First Amendment issue using the Supreme Court's guidance.