[savedbygrace]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Because the 1st Amendment forbids Congress from passing any "law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," then the laws which entangled the federal government in local schools in any way that prohibited the free exercise of religion by anyone was and is in violation of the Constitution.

It is those laws which must be declared null and void, not the free exercise of religion.

This is a logic expression that the Court has gotten wrong for the past 40+ years. They are supposed to be educated men and women, but they failed Logic 101, and continue to exhibit their pathetic failing.

[Irontank]

then the laws which entangled the federal government in local schools in any way that prohibited the free exercise of religion by anyone was and is in violation of the Constitution

Yes...any laws that entangle the federal government in local schools violate the Constitution...the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. By what (legitimate) authority does the federal government involve itself in matters of education?

[Tired of Taxes]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again

I don't know who you are, or where you've said anything before.

But, if you're saying that the federal gov't shouldn't be entangled in local schools, I agree with you. No Dept. of Educ. and no federal funds. Still, the schools would have to abide by state laws, and other arguments against religious endorsements/displays would apply. (The best option would be no gov't schools at all).

My question again: If the First Amendment only applies to Congress, then how is Congress/federal gov't entangled in a state courthouse that it would have jurisdiction over what is displayed there? I think it's an interesting argument to explore. Anyone know more?