Posted on 06/28/2005 6:44:42 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
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 ended yesterday. The delicate balance the court struck in the two cases offers further proof of the divisiveness of the questions posed.
In the second case, the court said a 6ft monument of the commandments on the grounds of the Texas state capitol did not violate the constitution, which prohibits any state “establishment” of religion. The 40-year-old display appears with 16 other monuments and the court noted its long history without controversy, as well as its context.
William Rehnquist, the chief justice of the US who is ill with thyroid cancer and widely expected to retire wrote the majority opinion. He read just a few sentences aloud, his breathing laboured.
Acknowledging the role of God in US history and the many displays of the Ten Commandments in public buildings, the majority said: “Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the establishment clause.”
In the Kentucky case, too, the majority acknowledged that such displays including a frieze within their own courtroom might be constitutional. But after examining the recent moves to display the commandments in the Kentucky courtrooms, a majority of the court ruled that the displays by two counties went too far to endorse religion.
Justice Scalia did not hide his disdain for his colleagues' seemingly divergent rulings in the two cases, complaining that “what distinguishes the rule of law from the dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in consistently applied principle”.
Instead, he suggested that the majority's opinion that the Kentucky display was unconstitutional was guided by “the instinct for self-preservation and the recognition that the court . . . cannot go too far down the road of an enforced neutrality . . .”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative activist group, called the Kentucky ruling “devastating”.
“Forbidding the Ten Commandments opens the door to hostility toward religion, which is contrary to the free exercise clause of the First Amendment,” he said. But the American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the case, applauded the Kentucky ruling.
“Our constitution's ban on government entanglement with religion is good for both government and religion,” the group said. “It keeps religion free and it allows government to represent us all.”
As a Kentuckian, let me say this: The SCOTUS made it's ruling, now let the SCOTUS enforce it.
Our High Court has moved from one outrage to another this session. Unfortunately, we've elected a bunch of wimps who are unable or unwilling to make changes.
I'm bookmarking for later.
It still seems to me, in almost all the discussions that occur, people focus on the POLICY question - is the ruling "right" or "wrong" in terms of what we want as a society, etc.
Let's not also lose sight of the concept of WHAT THE CONTSTITUTION SAYS. All the Supreme Court is supposed to do is interpret the law, not make it. If you don't like what the Constitution dictates, then change it. Otherwise, what do we need a legislature for?
The constitution does no such thing. All it says it that Congress shall make no laws respecting the establishment of a religion and the free exercise thereof. It forbids the creation of an "established religion". It says nothing about creches, christmas trees, the ten commandments, etc. It says nothing about government pretending that religions do not exist. It only requires that congress make no laws limiting the free exercise of religion.
Time for a good old fashioned ousting!
The ACLU is going to be out of a job soon if these men in black keep it up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.