Facts of the Case
Thomas Van Orden sued Texas in federal district court, arguing a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the state capitol building represented an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion. Orden argued this violated the First Amendment's establishment clause, which prohibits the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion." The district court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Orden and said the monument served a valid secular purpose and would not appear to a reasonable observer to represent a government endorsement of religion.
Questions
Does a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a state capitol building violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which barred the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?"
Conclusions
-
No. In 5-4 decision, and in a four-justice opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the establishment clause did not bar the monument on the grounds of Texas' state capitol building. The plurality deemed the Texas monument part of the nation's tradition of recognizing the Ten Commandments' historical meaning. Though the Commandments are religious, the plurality argued, "simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the establishment clause."
Interesting Establishment Clause Case in the Eleventh Circuit - Kondrat'Yev v. City of Pensacola
In May, the Eleventh Circuit will hear argument in Kondrat'Yev v. City of Pensacola (No....
It’s Not Just the Test That’s a Lemon, It’s How Some Judges Apply It
On March 2, 2005, the United States Supreme Court heard two cases involving public displays...
Exploring American Legion: What Shelving Lemon Could Mean for Monuments Litigation
In 2015, the Arkansas legislature authorized placement of a privately-donated Ten Commandments monument on the...
Richard W. Garnett Reviews Divided By God: America’s Church-State Problem—And What We Should Do About It by Noah Feldman
The Supreme Court this past summer handed down rulings in three closely watched, eagerly anticipated,...
Religious Liberty after Scalia
Some people opine that Antonin Scalia was not a friend of religious liberty, and that...
Can a New Establishment Clause Jurisprudence Succeed in Protecting Religious Minorities Where Lemon Has Failed?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
In Whose Name We Pray: Restoring the Establishment Clause in Town of Greece v. Galloway
Engage Volume 14, Issue 3 October 2013
Note from the Editor: This article is a discussion about the Establishment Clause issue in...
When a Pastor’s House Is a Church Home: Why the Parsonage Allowance Is Desirable Under the Establishment Clause
Federalist Society Review, Volume 18
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the parsonage allowance, whereby the value of a...
After Espinoza, What’s Left of the Establishment Clause?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
The Status of Use-Based Exclusions & Educational Choice After Espinoza
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Louisiana's Ten Commandments Statute and the Establishment Clause
On June 19, 2024, the governor of Louisiana signed into law House Bill No. 71....