General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Ten Commandments and the Supreme Court - Stone vs Graham (maybe a time to take a breath and calm a bit?)
Stone v. Graham
law case
https://www.britannica.com/event/Stone-v-Graham
Written by Malila Robinson
Fact-checked by the Editors of Encylopedia Britanica
Article History
Date:
November 17, 1980
Location:
United States
Stone v. Graham, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on November 17, 1980, ruled (54) that a Kentucky statute requiring school officials to post a copy of the Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on a wall in every public classroom violated the First Amendments establishment clause, which is commonly interpreted as a separation of church and state.
In addition to the posting of the Commandments, the Kentucky statute (1978) required that this notation was to be placed, in small print, at the bottom of each display: The secular application of the Ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common Law of the United States. Opponents of the statute claimed that it violated the establishment and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment. Sydell Stone, among others, sued, and James B. Graham, the states superintendent of education, was named as the respondent. A trial court upheld the statute, ruling that its purpose was secular. The case then went to the Kentucky Supreme Court, which was divided, thereby leaving the lower courts ruling in place.
In 1980 the case was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. In a per curiam (unsigned) opinion, it used the so-called Lemon test to evaluate whether the statute was permissible under the establishment clause. In Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), the Supreme Court held that (a) a statute must have a secular legislative purpose; (b) its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; and (c) the statute cannot promote an excessive government entanglement with religion. If any of the points are violated, the statute must be ruled unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court held that the Kentucky statute violated the first part of the so-called Lemon test. The court rejected arguments that the notation on the bottom of the Ten Commandments was sufficient to indicate the secular purpose of the posting. Moreover, the court was of the opinion that the posting of the Ten Commandments was clearly religious and not educational. The Commandments were not part of the curriculum, and the court maintained that the state was instead encouraging students to read, meditate upon, and perhaps venerate and obey the Commandments, which is a violation of the establishment clause. The court considered it to be irrelevant that the copies were bought with private funds, because displaying the Commandments demonstrated official state support of their message.
Malila N. Robinson
Louisiana's law will not stand. I don't think the legislators involved expected it to stand when they passed it. It's meant to be a lightening rod and some sort of "knee jerk issue" issue.
Uncle Eddie
(5 posts)This "law" was passed as a lob to the SCOTUS for a slam dunk on precedent. That whole argument about Stone v Graham is as safe as the argument about abortion precedent...meaningless. A secondary benefit is that it gives La governor a lot of media coverage. He wins even if the case loses
John1956PA
(5,118 posts). . . in the after-football-game-prayer-gathering case to find that "tradition" permits the posting of The Ten Commandments in public schools.
spanone
(142,051 posts)elocs
(24,486 posts)that they considered Roe to be settled law, they lied and awaited their first opportunity to reverse it. So if they did it with Roe, they will do it with whatever else they please.
LetMyPeopleVote
(181,969 posts)The Supreme Court has said Ten Commandments displays in public schools are unconstitutional. Louisiana Republicans passed a new law on this anyway.
Link to tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/louisianas-radical-new-law-ten-commandments-schools-matters-rcna158001
Louisiana has become the first state to require that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school classroom under a bill Republican Gov. Jeff Landry signed into law Wednesday. The GOP-drafted legislation mandates that a poster-size display of the Ten Commandments in a large, easily readable font be in all public classrooms, from kindergarten to state-funded universities.
Under the new law, which will take effect in 2025, assorted other documents including the Mayflower Compact and the Declaration of Independence can also be displayed in classrooms, but only the Decalogue is required.....
It wasnt long before Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, and the Freedom from Religion Foundation announced their intention to challenge the new law in court.
The law violates the separation of church and state and is blatantly unconstitutional, the groups said in a joint statement. The First Amendment promises that we all get to decide for ourselves what religious beliefs, if any, to hold and practice, without pressure from the government. Politicians have no business imposing their preferred religious doctrine on students and families in public schools.....
So why would Louisiana Republicans take a step that the Supreme Court has already rejected? Its probably because theyre confident that the newly politicized high court and its dominant far-right majority not to mention the brazen Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will simply overturn the Stone precedent, doing fresh harm to the wall thats supposed to separate church and state in this country.
I cant wait to be sued, Landry said at a fundraiser over the weekend. Those were the words of a partisan who expects his ideological judicial allies to let him trample over Louisianans religious rights.
Autumn
(49,019 posts)Until it wasn't.
SorellaLaBefana
(514 posts)Thank you for making this (one would have thought) obvious point.
There is A Vision, and they'll not stop until they Are STOPPED
Autumn
(49,019 posts)marble falls
(72,528 posts)... on 'equal access', and separation of church and state in the First Amendment's "freedom of religion". The mistake of Roe vs Wade was not putting it into the law of the land. We depended on the ruling too long.
Autumn
(49,019 posts)was a useful tool, it's been the main feature on the republican menu for a long time. I am not the least bit optimistic that this fucking corrupt court will knock down Louisiana's law stupid law.
RockRaven
(19,748 posts)so hanging a hat on a prior precedent is a very obtuse framing for analysis.
msongs
(74,172 posts)Raven123
(7,894 posts)Given the composition of todays court, not sure I am as confident as you.
Traildogbob
(13,156 posts)Those poster size Ten Commandments were printed over the trump mug shot, with Absolute Immunity printed in larger font at the top? Mandated in dorm rooms at state colleges.
marble falls
(72,528 posts)Alabama's Chief Judge Ordered to Remove Ten Commandments Monument from Courthouse
Affiliate: ACLU of Alabama
November 18, 2002 12:00 am
media@aclu.org
(212) 549-2666
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
United States
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/alabamas-chief-judge-ordered-remove-ten-commandments-monument-courthouse
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MONTGOMERY, AL A monument to the Ten Commandments displayed on the grounds of the state judicial building here was ordered removed today by a federal district judge who said the display crossed the line.
The federal court today vindicated the religious freedom of all Alabama citizens, not just those who share the Chief Justices views that a belief in a Christian God is the only real religion in Alabama, said Rob Weinberg, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, which along with other groups had challenged the display.
Following a seven-day trial, U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson gave Chief Justice Roy Moore 30 days to remove the two-and-a-half ton monument to the Judeo-Christian text he had erected last year in the rotunda of the State Judicial Building.
In a scholarly 79-page opinion, Judge Thompson rejected all of the Chief Justices arguments that his monument to the Ten Commandments was a legally permissible display that merely acknowledged God.
The ACLU and its clients had argued that the Judicial Building which houses Alabamas three highest courts of appeal should be a place where profession of religious faith is not a prerequisite to seeking justice.
Moore made no apologies when he testified at trial that his display was specifically meant as a monument to the Judeo-Christian God and not directed at a God of any other religions.
The federal court held that Moore violated the Constitution when he installed a two-and-a-half ton monument in the most prominent place in a government building, managed with dollars from all state taxpayers, with the specific purpose and effect of establishing a permanent recognition of the sovereignty of God, the Judeo-Christian God, over all citizens in this country, regardless of each taxpaying citizens individual personal beliefs or lack thereof. To this, the Establishment clause says no.
Two separate lawsuits, Glassroth v. Moore and Maddox et al. v. Moore, were filed on behalf of the three local attorneys by the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The decision in the case is online at http://www.almd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/index_of_opinions.htm
Bettie
(19,869 posts)than most of us do.
They are there to advance a right wing Christian worldview, they are theocrats dressed as judges. They have shown that precedent means nothing to them, unless it advances the worldview that they are shooting for.
marble falls
(72,528 posts)Supreme Court backs push to remove Ten Commandments monument
Published 1:23 PM CDT, October 16, 2017
https://apnews.com/general-news-df7741ba91c549d48242e88f16d6c1b9
WASHINGTON (AP) The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall.
Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.
ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.
-snip-
The city claims it avoided endorsing a particular religion by placing disclaimers on the lawn stating the area was a public forum for citizens and that the privately funded monuments did not necessarily reflect the opinions of the city.
-snip-