The mayor of Quincy’s controversial quest to install two 10-foot-tall bronze statues of Catholic saints at a city building hit a major roadblock Thursday when the state’s highest court ruled against him in a case that’s drawn national attention as a tension point in the long-running debate over the separation of church and state.
The 34-page ruling is not the final word on the statues of St. Michael and St. Florian, who are associated with police and firefighters, respectively. Technically, the Supreme Judicial Court’s ruling affirmed a lower-court judge’s decision to temporarily halt installation of the statues while a lawsuit against the city moves forward.
But the ruling will keep the two large statues, whose renderings portray the saints in victory poses that show off rippling abs, in storage. And, the SJC was clear in its skepticism of Mayor Thomas Koch’s push, writing that the opponents of the statues are likely to succeed in the lawsuit.
It’s likely Quincy “has violated important constitutional rights and has spent, and plans to continue to spend, taxpayer dollars in violation of those rights that will not be recoverable,” Supreme Judicial Court Associate Justice Scott L. Kafker wrote in a unanimous decision.
Even so, Koch vowed to fight on.
“Quincy’s firefighters and police put their lives on the line for this city every day, and these statues were chosen to honor their bravery, service, and sacrifice,” Koch’s spokesperson wrote in an email to the Globe after the ruling. “This decision is disappointing, but it is preliminary, and we will continue to fight for the ability to commemorate our first responders as the law permits.”
The decision extends beyond the boundaries of Quincy. The debate around the role of religion in government is older than the country itself, a flashpoint the founders were compelled to address with the First Amendment of the Constitution, but which remains contested through to the present day.
This case led Quincy to push the court to change its longstanding legal framework for ruling on religious symbolism by government entities. Ultimately, the SJC rejected this request.
“Here in Massachusetts, our state constitution is clear: the government must remain neutral in matters of religion and must not elevate one faith above others,” said Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts, which represented the plaintiffs and cheered the decision in a press release. “With today’s landmark ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court affirms those principles, which are the essential foundation of a pluralistic society where people of all faiths and no faith can flourish.”
The saga around the statues began July 2023, when Koch contracted a sculptor in Italy to create the statues of Saint Michael and Saint Florian, which the longtime mayor wanted to place in prominent spots outside the city’s public safety building, which opened this year.
The statues alone were estimated to cost $850,000, Kafker wrote, based on testimony before the SJC.
Kafker describes the two statues vividly: “One statue depicts Saint Michael, an archangel with wings, stepping on the head and neck of a demon. The other depicts Saint Florian, a larger-than-life Roman soldier towering above a burning building and extinguishing the fire with water from a single vessel.”
Koch’s plan remained under wraps until 2025, when The Patriot Ledger in Quincy reported on the cost of the statues and the use of the Catholic imagery on a public building. The news sparked opposition by some religious leaders and civil libertarians and prompted contentious City Council meetings.
Some residents, represented by the ACLU, sued, leading Superior Court Judge William F. Sullivan — now well known for presiding over the Lindsay Clancy triple-murder case — to grant a preliminary injunction in 2025 against installing the statues.
“The Court is not persuaded by the Mayor’s self-serving assertions, particularly in light of his curious actions of commissioning the statues without public knowledge,” Sullivan wrote. “Regardless, the Mayor’s professed secular purpose offers nothing more than semantics.”
Koch appealed that decision. The SJC took the case and heard arguments in May before issuing the decision on Thursday.
As the case reached the SJC, groups on both sides of the church-and-state debate piled in, filing amicus briefs; among more than a dozen amicus briefs, groups weighing in on the issue include the Massachusetts Family Institute, the National Fraternal Order of Police, the Islam and Religious Freedom Action Team, and the Protect The First Foundation. And even more directly, the ACLU is representing the statues’ opponents, while the Becket Fund, a religious-rights organization, is representing the city and Koch.
The statues remain in storage in Randolph, and the mayor’s office confirmed they will remain there as the lawsuit moves forward. The city has spent $761,378.75 for their design and construction, the court said, citing testimony.
Koch, a devout Catholic who left the Democratic Party and became unenrolled nearly a decade ago due to his firm anti-abortion stance, has defended the decision to put up the statues, saying they have taken on secular meanings in their important to police and firefighters.
Indeed, Kafker, the SJC justice, acknowledged the importance of these two saints to many first responders, citing submissions in the case from Quincy firefighters and police officers. He noted that firefighters use the Florian cross on their equipment, that a union hall for Boston firefighters is called Florian Hall, and International Firefighters Day is celebrated May 4, St. Florian’s feast day.
He also wrote that a St. Michael tattoo is common on police officers, and some law-enforcement awards are named after the guardian angel.
Yet a secular meaning isn’t enough for objects that are clearly religious, he wrote. That’s especially true, Kafker wrote, given that these statues are not part of a broader collection that could place them in a secular context.
“They stand tall and alone, adorned with Catholic iconography,” Kafker wrote.
The court cited Article 3 of the state’s Declaration of Rights, as amended in 1833, which bars government from advancing one religion over another.
“These new statues have a greater potential to be perceived as government endorsement of a particular religion, and subordination of other religions, in violation of art. 3,” the high court said.
The SJC said the balance between the secular meaning and the religious one can be explored if litigation continues.
Ultimately, Kafker found, “the issue presented is not government hostility to religion but government preferential treatment of a particular religion.”
Sean Cotter can be reached at sean.cotter@globe.com. Follow him @cotterreporter. John R. Ellement can be reached at john.ellement@globe.com. Follow him @JREbosglobe.