[lonevoice]

Yes they would. And Sea-Tac would lose. For better or worse the case law on this has been settled for years. If a public agency wants exclusively Christian displays during the Christian season, to the exclusion of others, they're out of luck.

In regards to displaying decorated trees during the holiday season, I've understood quite differently from Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU and from ACLU of Illinois v St. Charles. Case law has been clear that Christmas trees (or holiday trees as they're now called) are a secular, not a religious symbol, and their public display creates no constitutional conflict.

[SJackson]

In regards to displaying decorated trees during the holiday season, I've understood quite differently from Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU and from ACLU of Illinois v St. Charles. Case law has been clear that Christmas trees (or holiday trees as they're now called) are a secular, not a religious symbol, and their public display creates no constitutional conflict.

Maybe of FR lawyer will stop by, but I don't think the tree was at issue there, only the menorah, and significant only because it's display next to the menorah lent it a secular quality. As I understand it they're both considered symbols with both secular and religious characteristics.

That wasn't the issue here, though, rather the display of one and the banning of the other.