True.
Supposedly, placing it there was a violation of the first amendment. However, the text states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Congress did not place the monument there, placing it there did make anything law, nor did it establish any religion. So where is the Federal authority to say anything on this.
The Courts have taken the position that states cannot take steps respecting the establishment of religion, either. And the state's constitution also forbids it. By placing a monument bearing a version of the 10 Commandments followed by specific sects of Christianity then Moore was using his position to place them above Roman Catholics or Jews, not to mention non-Christian religions. That's a no-no.
"Moore was using his position to place them above Roman Catholics or Jews, not to mention non-Christian religions. That's a no-no."
1. All Christians, including Catholics trace their religions back through the old testament, which stems from Judaism, so they are not left out either.
2. Our laws stem from the Ten Commandments, Exodus, Leviticus, and the other books of the talmud. Displaying this history is not wrong. The monument had quotes from Adams and Mason. And if Buddhists, Muslims, Atheists, sun-worshipers, etc. don't like it, that is not our problem. If they don't like living under laws that trace their history back to Hebrew tablets, supposedly carved by God himself, they can go somewhere else. And if they still choose to live here, as Scalia says, they can avert their eyes if they don't like looking at it. But there's nothing wrong with it being there.