Free Republic

Is there any room for Moses in an American courthouse? Or must the old lawgiver of Exodus 20 be forever banished into outer darkness? The Supreme Court may give us a hint after it hears argument in two cases presenting the same tough question: Is it constitutionally permissible for an agency of government, such as a public park or a county courthouse, to display the Ten Commandments? On this issue, the lower federal courts are sharply divided. In Van Orden v. Perry, the 5th Circuit said yes, it's OK. In McCreary County v. ACLU, the 6th Circuit said no, it's...

The trouble with the Kentucky display of the Ten Commandments, said the Supreme Court, while approving a similar display in Texas, is that the it was motivated by a "predominantly religious purpose." The trouble with the court's confusing -- some say absurd -- rulings, says Kevin "Seamus" Hasson of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, is that they proceed from an impossible premise. "The 'predominantly religious' test suggests that anything not predominantly secular must be religious. It in fact has strong anti -religious overtones." Hasson, whose organization is devoted to defending the free expression of all religious traditions, believes the...

From his dissent in the Kentucky ten commandments case, McCreary Co. v. ACLU: Assuming the meaning of the Constitution ought to change according to “democratic aspirations,” why are those aspirations to be found in Justices’ notions of what the Establishment Clause ought to mean, rather than in the democratically adopted dispositions of our current society? Numerous provisions of our laws and numerous continuing practices of our people demonstrate that the government’s invocation of God is unobjectionable – including a statute enacted by Congress almost unanimously less that three years ago, stating that “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is...

Man in 10 Commandments Case Fears for Safety After Paper Prints Name Published: July 04, 2005 10:30 AM ET OMAHA The man at the center of a challenge to remove a Ten Commandments monument displayed in a public park said he feared for his safety after a newspaper revealed his name Sunday. The Omaha World-Herald in its Sunday editions identified the man, an atheist, who brought the suit against the city of Plattsmouth in 2001 with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union. Last September, a federal judge declined a request from the ACLU to stop the paper from...

The Supreme Court wrapped up one of its most disappointing terms in years. Plagued by Chief Justice Rehnquist's absence due to illness, the other justices behaved like the gang that could not shoot straight. The Supreme Court banished the Ten Commandments from courthouses in McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union, and ruled against private property in Kelo v. City of New London. The term would have been a complete disaster if Justice Stephen G. Breyer, a Clinton-appointee, had not surprisingly voted to save the Ten Commandments displayed on the Texas State Capitol grounds in Van Orden v. Perry. The...

"All told this Court's jurisprudence leaves courts, governments, and believers and nonbelievers alike confused--an observation that is hardly new." With these words Justice Clarence Thomas accurately described the Supreme Court's latest efforts in McCreary County v. ACLU and Van Orden v. Perry to determine whether public displays of the Ten Commandments on state property are consistent with the U.S. Constitution. In McCreary County, the court ruled 5-4 that the display of the Ten Commandments was unconstitutional under the Lemon test because they found a "predominantly religious purpose," i.e., to acknowledge the one true God. In Van Orden, faced with a...

WHITLEY CITY, Ky. - It's one of the more conspicuous road signs on U.S. 27, a scenic route that meanders through the Daniel Boone National Forest on its way to a popular recreational area on Lake Cumberland. "WARNING. Jesus is coming. RU Ready?" Such proclamations, already common throughout the Bible Belt, could proliferate along roadsides in reaction to a Supreme Court ruling barring displays of the Ten Commandments in two southern Kentucky courthouses, said Don Swarthout, head of the Kentucky-based Christians Reviving America's Values. "People want to do something to reflect their principles, and that's one way they can legally...

WASHINGTON D.C.— A constitutional amendment that would protect public expressions of faith and religion was introduced, after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling removed the Ten Commandments from a Kentucky courthouse, reported CNSNews.com. Buoyed by pro-family groups, more than 100 congressmen proposed the Religious Freedom Amendment."Intolerant people have been attacking the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance, voluntary prayers at school, and other religious expression, but this amendment will halt those attacks," said Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) in a statement. The Supreme Court has sent the clear message to public officials that “they will face an onslaught of expensive litigation...

...We need to restore the original definitions of "law," "establishment," and "religion" in the First Amendment. A monument or display could never be a "law," the mere posting or installation of it is not an "establishment," and the recognition of God by the public display of the Ten Commandments is not "religion." After all, the original definition of the word "religion" -- the duties we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging those duties -- which was recognized by the Supreme Court years ago, acknowledged God and a higher law. ...[I]t should be clear that, as Justice Antonin...

When the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit against a Ten Commandments display hanging in the breezeway of the courthouse in Winder, Barrow County officials rallied behind the exhibit and vowed to defend it. On Monday, after sifting through two highly anticipated U.S. Supreme Court rulings over displays in Kentucky and Texas, a top Barrow official said it was unclear how the decisions will affect his county's defense. But an ACLU lawyer predicted the rulings will lead to the eventual removal of the display. "Both opinions strengthen our case," ACLU attorney Maggie Garrett said. "There was an obvious religious purpose...

LANCASTER, Pa., June 28 /U.S. Newswire/ -- "Decisions of the Supreme Court regarding public display of the Ten Commandments reflect a continuing disregard of the moral and legal principles upon which our nation was established," observes William K. Shearer, spokesperson for, and past chairman of, the Constitution Party. "To deny recognition of the Ten Commandments is to reject a fundamental cornerstone of America's legal and cultural heritage," he says."The First Amendment states that Congress shall not interfere with the free exercise of religion, and Congress shall not establish a religion. Recognition of the country's Biblical heritage is not the establishment...

The Supreme Court stepped into one of the most contested fronts of the US culture war on Monday, ruling that the display of framed copies of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses crossed the constitutional line between church and state. The five-to-four decision provoked an angry response from Justice Antonin Scalia, who took the unusual step of reading his dissenting opinion from the bench. “Today's opinion ratchets up this court's hostility to religion,” he said, his voice emotional. That ruling, and another on the public display of the commandments, were among the most closely watched of the court's term, which...

So we in Texas get to keep our Ten Commandments monument -- all six feet of it, reposing quietly on the State Capitol grounds -- whereas two Kentucky counties have to remove the Big Ten from their courthouses. And blamed if I can see why, but, then, blamed if anyone this side of the barred windows in the state institution for the mentally incapacitated can ever see what the U.S. Supreme Court means when it defines religious "entanglement" under the First Amendment. Oh, we can read the decisions all right -- two of them this week. We just can't tell...

...In van Orden v. Perry, the Court allowed a six-foot granite monument to the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the Texas capitol. But in McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, it decided that a display of framed copies of the Ten Commandments inside two Kentucky courthouses was going too far. ...Reading through the majority opinions, it seems that the difference boils down to such "context" dependent issues as the fact that the granite monument was old -- it had been there since 1961 -- while the Kentucky commandments were of newer vintage and therefore possibly a product of the...

<p>WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday rendered two more hairsplitting, migraine-inducing decisions about when religious displays on public property do and do not violate the First Amendment protection against ``establishment'' of religion. In a case from Texas, where a Ten Commandments monument stands outside the state Capitol, the court, splintered six ways from Sunday, said: We find no constitutional violation. The second case came from Kentucky, where the Commandments displayed in several courthouses are surrounded by historical symbols and documents -- e.g., copies of the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, the Star Spangled Banner -- to comply with the ``reindeer rule,'' more about which anon. On Monday the court recoiled from Kentucky's displays, saying, they are unconstitutionally motivated by a ``predominately religious purpose.'' Not enough reindeer?</p>

The Ten Commandments: Incremental hair-splitting Tuesday, June 28, 2005 The Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the posting of the Ten Commandments in two Kentucky courthouses.snip In Texas, however, a 6-foot granite monument at the Statehouse was validated as not being too religious. It is one of 17 historical displays on a large lot. One can read the decisions in whole as being irrational because they announce no firm rules of law. The justices, instead, will take up these matters on a case-by-case basis -- after they convene by asking God to look favorably upon the court. If the justices voting against...

Perhaps nothing illustrates this era of judicial lawlessness better than the Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that the Ten Commandments, unless they are somehow aesthetically muted and secularized, be chiseled off courthouses across the country. Lawless judges cannot abide the sight of fixed laws adorning courts. Imagine if the representatives of the states at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 had a chance to review David Souter's secularized understanding of the First Amendment before deciding whether or not to ratify the Constitution. Would any of the states have ratified it? Would they have agreed to a constitution that gave federal judges the...

Limits of Religion in Public Life Court acts wisely on Ten Commandments rulings The Monitor's View On the stage on which the American culture clash over religion is playing out, enter the Supreme Court. Monday's twin decisions allowing the display of the Ten Commandments on the Texas State Capitol grounds, but not in Kentucky courtrooms, settle a major contentious issue between political religious conservatives and secular humanists. In this contest, religious conservatives seek to advance a brand of morality in America by actively promoting religious themes and ideas in government. On the other side, secular humanists demand a strict elimination...

Scalia, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 03—1693 McCREARY COUNTY, KENTUCKY, et al., PETI- TIONERS v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF KENTUCKY et al. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Justice Scalia, with whom The Chief Justice and Justice Thomas join, and with whom Justice Kennedy joins as to Parts II and III, dissenting. I would uphold McCreary County and Pulaski County, Kentucky’s (hereinafter Counties) displays of the Ten Commandments. I shall discuss first, why the Court’s oft repeated assertion that the government cannot favor religious practice is...

Court Allows 10 Commandments on Seized Land by Scott Ott (2005-06-27) -- In a pair of rulings on the constitutionality of the 10 Commandments on government property, the Supreme Court today said the commandments may be displayed on public land if that property has been seized from private owners for 'public purposes' under eminent domain. The 5-4 decision comes on the heels of this week's court declaration that so-called "private" property is actually government land temporarily under private management until its eventual seizure. In a second ruling handed down today, the Supreme Court banned the 10 commandments from appearing in...

Don Feder, President of Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation, said Americans should be up in arms over the Supreme Court's Ten Commandments decisions. "The Court persists in its tradition of deliberately misinterpreting the First Amendment's Establishment Clause," Feder complained. "An 'establishment of religion' means a national church - not a crèche in a park at Christmas, not a moment of silent meditation at the start of the school day, and not a public display of the Ten Commandments." Feder explained," The Court has put itself in a bind - hence its often wildly inconsistent rulings on so-call separation cases, which are...

In a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down displays of the Ten Commandments at courthouses. It was the first decision on the issue since the court ruled 25 years ago that the Commandments could not be displayed in public schools. At issue was the constitutionality of framed copies of the Commandments in two Kentucky courthouses. The court declined to ban all displays on government property, saying some, like their own courtroom frieze, are allowed if they have a neutral purpose, such as honoring the nation's legal history. But the Kentucky displays were deemed a promotion of religion. Writing...

YES, BUT NO: Supreme Court: Ten Commandments displays are allowed on government land... Not In Courthouses... Internet File-Sharing Services May Be Sued... Cable Companies Don't Need to Share Lines... Won't Hear CIA Leak Case; Reporters Face Jail... Cops Can't Be Sued for Restraining Orders... Court Wire...

(06-27) 07:19 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) -- A split Supreme Court struck down Ten Commandments displays in courthouses Monday, ruling that two exhibits in Kentucky cross the line between separation of church and state because they promote a religious message. The 5-4 decision was the first of two seeking to mediate the bitter culture war over religion's place in public life. In it, the court declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property. Justices left legal wiggle room, saying that some displays — like their own courtroom frieze — would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in...

High Court Gives Split Decisions On Ten Commandments POSTED: 9:10 am CDT June 27, 2005 UPDATED: 10:19 am CDT June 27, 2005 SUPREME COURT -- There have been two closely-watched rulings on church-state separation. The Supreme Court said Monday that Ten Commandments displays in two Kentucky courthouses cross the line between church and state. The justices -- in a 5-4 vote -- rejected those displays, saying they promote a religious message. But the justices declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property. They said some displays, such as the one in their own courtroom, would be...

To reach the state of Kentucky's placement of the 10 Commandment in a state courthouse, the Court has to first hold that the 14th Amendment made the First Amendment applicable to the states (remember that it says "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion") Did the 14th Amendment make the 1st Amendment applicable against the states? Well, that's what the Supreme Court has said since 1947...but its a lie We know its a lie because, in 1875 (only 7 years after it passed the 14th Amendment), the Congress debated adding another amendment (known as the Blaine...

All the headlines today are reading “Ten Commandments Unconstitutional!” But the truth is that the Supreme Court has once again failed to truly take a stand on yet another moral issue. Read More... Craig DeLuzVisit The Home of Uncommon Sense… www.craigdeluz.com

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court on Monday struck down Ten Commandments displays in two Kentucky courthouses, but said a 6-foot granite replica on government land in Texas was acceptable. In the first ruling, McCreary County v. ACLU (search), the court said that the Kentucky displays violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits government from endorsing or supporting one religion above others. The justices ruled split 5-4 that the Ten Commandments (search) could not be displayed in court buildings or on government property. However, the Biblical laws could be displayed in an historical context, as they are...

will post more info as it comes in...

WASHINGTON - People in two northeast Georgia counties will no doubt be watching very closely for a ruling expected this morning from the Supreme Court. The nation's highest court is expected to announce a ruling on the constitutionality of the display of copies of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Both Habersham and Barrow counties have, in recent years, been the scene of highly-publicized cass involving such displays.

RULINGS IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S TEN COMMANDMENTS CASES June 27, 2005 In different rulings, the justices ban displays of the Ten Commandments at courthouses, but allow them to be placed on government land. The Courthouse Ruling: Opinion (McCreary County v. ACLU)http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/03-1693.html The ACLU's Attorneyhttp://pview.findlaw.com/view/3433759_1 Attorney for Liberty Counselhttp://pview.findlaw.com/view/1438042_1 Case Dockethttp://rd.findlaw.com/scripts/nl.pl?url=11198556000_nl The Government Land Ruling: Opinion (Van Orden v. Perry)http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/03-1500.html Attorney for Texashttp://pview.findlaw.com/vie

LAW OF THE LAND Bush backs Ten Commandments Justice Department weighs in on Supreme Court case -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: December 11, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com Arguing that religion "has played a defining role" in American history, the Bush administration urged the U.S. Supreme Court to allow Ten Commandments displays in courthouses. A brief filed by the Justice Department supports two Kentucky counties accused of violating the First Amendment ban on congressional establishment of religion by posting copies of the Ten Commandments. As WorldNetDaily reported, the Supreme Court will hear arguments early next year and likely will issue...

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court to allow Ten Commandments displays on government property, adding a federal view on a major church-state case that justices will deal with early next year. The government has weighed in before in religion cases at the high court, including one earlier this year that challenged the words "under God" in the classroom recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The government supported a California school district in that case. Now, it is backing two Kentucky counties that had framed copies of the Ten Commandments in their courthouses. The American Civil...