An impression of an establishment is not an establishment. It's not an establishment of a religion just because of how you feel about it. This is the same mistake the left always makes, they don't understand the difference between persuasion and coercion.
It's not a law, it's a monument. The federal court isn't demanding that an unconstitutional law be overturned, they are demanding that a government official cease expressing his religious beliefs, which is forbidden by the other clause in the first amendment (you know the one).
After reading this whole thread, I've come to realize that NONE OF YOU have heard the real basis for the judge's adamant justification for keeping the tablets. He is basing his justification on the State Constitution, which goes into great detail to recognize God and Biblical principles. His point is that the tablets reflect nothing more than the existing State Constitution's own words.
I think you'd all be surprised at the wording of many state's Constitutions. Maybe you should check the one out for your own state.
ANYWAY, if that's true, then the state's Constitution will also need to be revised ie REDACTED. They can't keep one and throw out the other. In other words.....IT'S ILLEGAL to throw out something that supports the state Constitution. But, alas, they didn't use logic, law, or reasoning to make their final decision. Bottomline, it's unConstitutional (per their own state). They screwed up. They're outside the law.