Supremes to Rule on Decalogue
Compiled by Ted Olsen posted 10/12/2004 2:30 p.m. Christianity Today
Days after rejecting Roy Moore case, Supremes say they'll rule in two Decalogue disputesIn what the Associated Press calls "a surprise announcement," the Supreme Court today said it will consider two cases focusing on public displays of the Ten Commandments.
Liberty Counsel, which represents three Kentucky counties in one of the two cases, calls it "the blockbuster church/state case of the year."
"The decision to review a case involving the display of the Ten Commandments is long overdue," Liberty Counsel president Mat Staver says in a press release. "The lower courts are hopelessly in confusion over the constitutionality of governmental displays of the Ten Commandments."
The Kentucky case focuses on county officials' posting the Decalogue in courthouses, and their adding other historical documents to the display after complaints. In December, a panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the displays were religious in nature and therefore unconstitutional.
But last November, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a similar display in Texas has "both a religious and secular message," and is therefore constitutional.
The Associated Press says the justices will consider the two cases separately. Last week, the Supreme Court declined to hear former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's appeal to be reinstated after he was removed from office for not removing a massive Commandments monument.
In the 1980 case Stone v. Graham, the Supreme Court ruled that it's unconstitutional to post the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. But that decision narrowly focused its decision on the nature of students as a "captive audience," so the question of other public displays is still unsettled.
We're still waiting to hear whether the Supreme Court will consider Bass v. Madison, which challenges the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). As with the Commandments cases, decisions have split on the U.S. district court level. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that inmate Ira Madison does indeed have the right to a kosher diet under RLUIPA, which the court says does not unconstitutionally advance religion. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, said that the law does have "the primary effect of advancing religion," and said prisons may deny inmates access to religious literature and the opportunity to conduct religious services.
The Commandments cases may indeed be a "blockbuster" in the sense of getting much public attention. But the question there is whether the state can honor religious statements, whereas the question in the RLUIPA cases is whether the state can at whim bar religious activity. To lose the former would be a travesty. To lose the latter would be tyranny.
Days after rejecting Roy Moore case, Supremes say they'll rule in two Decalogue disputesIn what the Associated Press calls "a surprise announcement," the Supreme Court today said it will consider two cases focusing on public displays of the Ten Commandments.
Liberty Counsel, which represents three Kentucky counties in one of the two cases, calls it "the blockbuster church/state case of the year."
"The decision to review a case involving the display of the Ten Commandments is long overdue," Liberty Counsel president Mat Staver says in a press release. "The lower courts are hopelessly in confusion over the constitutionality of governmental displays of the Ten Commandments."
The Kentucky case focuses on county officials' posting the Decalogue in courthouses, and their adding other historical documents to the display after complaints. In December, a panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the displays were religious in nature and therefore unconstitutional.
But last November, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a similar display in Texas has "both a religious and secular message," and is therefore constitutional.
The Associated Press says the justices will consider the two cases separately. Last week, the Supreme Court declined to hear former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's appeal to be reinstated after he was removed from office for not removing a massive Commandments monument.
In the 1980 case Stone v. Graham, the Supreme Court ruled that it's unconstitutional to post the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. But that decision narrowly focused its decision on the nature of students as a "captive audience," so the question of other public displays is still unsettled.
We're still waiting to hear whether the Supreme Court will consider Bass v. Madison, which challenges the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). As with the Commandments cases, decisions have split on the U.S. district court level. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that inmate Ira Madison does indeed have the right to a kosher diet under RLUIPA, which the court says does not unconstitutionally advance religion. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, said that the law does have "the primary effect of advancing religion," and said prisons may deny inmates access to religious literature and the opportunity to conduct religious services.
The Commandments cases may indeed be a "blockbuster" in the sense of getting much public attention. But the question there is whether the state can honor religious statements, whereas the question in the RLUIPA cases is whether the state can at whim bar religious activity. To lose the former would be a travesty. To lose the latter would be tyranny.
posted by JCH | 10:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home