n Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, rejecting a Texas school district's policy of allowing student-led prayer at high-school football games. Shortly after the ruling was announced, National Review Online spoke with the American Center for Law and Justice's Jay Sekulow, who argued the case for the Santa Fe Independent School District before the Court.

Lopez: Did the Santa Fe ruling come as a surprise?

Sekulow: Disappointment might be a more appropriate term. The argument was very tough, we knew it was going to be a close case, but we're disappointed in the idea that they've converted a private speech of students into government action. We just think the Supreme Court got it wrong here.

Lopez: Your says the decision is "confusing and distorting." What's confusing and distorting about it?

Sekulow: Confusing because they blur the line between private speech and government speech. Distorting because the precedent has been supported. The chief justice actually used that phrase, "distorting."

Lopez: Given this ruling, what's the future of prayer in schools?

Sekulow: The issue has been litigated for 40 years and I expect that it will be litigated for another 40. I don't think it's going away, that's for sure.

Lopez: Are there any more school prayer cases on the horizon?

Sekulow: There's a whole series of them out on the Fifth, Eleventh, and Ninth circuit court of appeals, so there are all lot of them still pending.

Lopez: Given this court, do any other those have a better chance of coming down in favor of student-led prayer?

Sekulow: I think the valedictorian case probably will.

Lopez: Why?

Sekulow: The class valedictorian was selected for graduation and decided to give a prayer as part of the message, and is then censored. It has a better shot because here you have a student vote involved, as part of the selection process.