{"id":7756,"date":"2026-04-24T03:10:23","date_gmt":"2026-04-23T21:40:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/the-radical-decision-letting-the-ten-commandments-be-posted-in-texas-classrooms\/"},"modified":"2026-04-24T03:10:23","modified_gmt":"2026-04-23T21:40:23","slug":"the-radical-decision-letting-the-ten-commandments-be-posted-in-texas-classrooms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/the-radical-decision-letting-the-ten-commandments-be-posted-in-texas-classrooms\/","title":{"rendered":"The radical decision letting the Ten Commandments be posted in Texas classrooms"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div itemprop=\"articleBody\">\n<p><iframe title=\"Everlit Audio Player\" src=\"https:\/\/everlit.audio\/embeds\/artl_Dayv5UG8OgP?ui_title_intro=Listen+now%3A&amp;client=wp&amp;client_version=2.7.1\" width=\"100%\" height=\"136px\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" allowfullscreen=\"\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>(RNS) \u2014 On Tuesday (April 21), the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave Texas the green light to require every public elementary and secondary school classroom in the state to display the King James Version\u2019s translation of the Ten Commandments. In its decision in <a href=\"https:\/\/assets.aclu.org\/live\/uploads\/2026\/04\/2026-04-21-PUBLISHED-OPINION-FILED.-25-50695-Reversed-Judge-Nathan-v.-Alamo-Heights-ISD-ca5-2025-50695-00507945887.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District<\/a>, the court\u2019s 9-8 majority both rejected long-standing precedent and grounded its ruling in an interpretation of the First Amendment\u2019s establishment clause that is at odds with how the Supreme Court has understood it for over 60 years.<\/p>\n<p>The precedent is <a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/449\/39\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Stone v. Graham<\/a>, in which the Supreme Court in 1980 ruled unconstitutional a comparable Kentucky law requiring a copy of the Ten Commandments to be posted in every public elementary and secondary school classroom. That decision relied on the so-called Lemon test, <span data-subtree=\"aimfl,mfl\">a three-pronged Supreme Court standard created in <\/span><a class=\"GI370e\" href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&amp;q=Lemon+v.+Kurtzman&amp;mstk=AUtExfCUN1Qt3ZXTO-pU9wuLlZJyIDQZFmxE2k-pn9dfDcMnvGMojE81piZ_2RHdeA-Hhqb_VIaBde_BRT5blGpWlM-ICVoW_pMKFnyR3Wk6t5MreFHP5DduiUt9IWAOhyUbAnA&amp;csui=3&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjf66ufhoSUAxXQq4kEHX-jCVgQgK4QegYIAQgAEAM\" data-ved=\"2ahUKEwjf66ufhoSUAxXQq4kEHX-jCVgQgK4QegYIAQgAEAM\" data-hveid=\"CAEIABAD\">Lemon v. Kurtzma<\/a><a class=\"GI370e\" href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&amp;q=Lemon+v.+Kurtzman&amp;mstk=AUtExfCUN1Qt3ZXTO-pU9wuLlZJyIDQZFmxE2k-pn9dfDcMnvGMojE81piZ_2RHdeA-Hhqb_VIaBde_BRT5blGpWlM-ICVoW_pMKFnyR3Wk6t5MreFHP5DduiUt9IWAOhyUbAnA&amp;csui=3&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjf66ufhoSUAxXQq4kEHX-jCVgQgK4QegYIAQgAEAM\" data-ved=\"2ahUKEwjf66ufhoSUAxXQq4kEHX-jCVgQgK4QegYIAQgAEAM\" data-hveid=\"CAEIABAD\">n<\/a> (1971) to determine if government actions or laws violated the First Amendment\u2019s establishment clause. To be constitutional, a law had to have a secular purpose, have a primary effect that neither advanced nor inhibited religion and should not foster excessive government entanglement with religion.<\/p>\n<p>Because the Supreme Court has in recent years abandoned this test \u2014 notably in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/21pdf\/21-418_i425.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Kennedy v. Bremerton School District<\/a> (2022) \u2014 the appeals court felt entitled to consider Stone as no longer binding.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>The Stone court rejected as pretextual a provision of <a href=\"https:\/\/apps.legislature.ky.gov\/law\/statutes\/statute.aspx?id=3463\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">the Kentucky law<\/a> mandating that after the last of the displayed Commandments there be a notation in fine print reading, \u201cThe 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.\u201d A claim of educational function could not be used to hide religious purpose, said the court.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/capitol.texas.gov\/tlodocs\/89R\/billtext\/pdf\/SB00010I.pdf#:~:text=(a)%20Subject%20to%20Subsection%20(e)%2C%20a%20public,16%20inches%20wide%20and%2020%20inches%20tall.\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The Texas law<\/a> in question contains no such claim, nor does the 5th Circuit assert one. Rather, it contends (without citing any cases) that \u201ccourts now ask a question rooted in the past: does the law at issue resemble a founding-era religious establishment?\u201d To answer this originalist question, the court adopts six \u201challmarks\u201d of 18th-century religious establishments:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>(1) government control over religious doctrine, governance, and church personnel; (2) compulsory church attendance; (3) compelled financial support, especially in the form of land grants and religious taxes; (4) prohibitions on worship in dissenting churches; (5) use of church institutions for civil functions; and (6) restriction of political participation to members of the established church.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Because the Texas law \u201cbears none of the hallmarks of a founding-era establishment of religion,\u201d the court concludes that it does not violate the establishment clause.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_4194385\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"width: 750px;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-4194385\" src=\"https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"750\" height=\"563\" srcset=\"https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1.jpg 1600w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-427x320.jpg 427w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-807x605.jpg 807w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-768x576.jpg 768w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/religionnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/webRNS-Ten-Commandments-Texas1-600x450.jpg 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 750px) 100vw, 750px\"\/> <\/p>\n<p class=\"wp-caption-text edd-enabled\"><span class=\"caption\">Visitors walk past a granite monument of the Ten Commandments outside the state Capitol, June 20, 2024, in Austin, Texas. (AP Photo\/Paul Weber)<\/span><span class=\"credit\"\/><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>A problem with this way of understanding the establishment clause is that the clause does not say \u201cCongress shall make no law creating a religious establishment.\u201d It says, \u201cCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.\u201d And the man who presided over the drafting of that language, James Madison, did not mean to restrict it to prohibiting a formal establishment like the Church of England. As he later <a href=\"https:\/\/press-pubs.uchicago.edu\/founders\/documents\/amendI_religions64.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">explained<\/a>, \u201cThe Constitution of the U.S. forbids <em>everything like <\/em>an establishment of a national religion.\u201d (italics added)<\/p>\n<p>Under \u201ceverything like\u201d Madison included the hiring of congressional and military chaplains and \u201cReligious proclamations by the Executive recommending thanksgivings &amp; fasts.\u201d There can be little doubt that, had state laws been placed under the aegis of the Bill of Rights when he was alive, he would have also included the posting of religious injunctions in public schools.<\/p>\n<p>Be that as it may, by the 5th Circuit\u2019s standard of review, establishment clause bans going back to the school prayer and Bible-reading decisions of the 1960s would be thrown out, since they do not violate any of the \u201challmarks.\u201d Or, as one of the three dissents in the case points out, \u201cThe majority\u2019s reduced Establishment Clause would allow state governments to evangelize by affixing a crucifix \u2014 or a mezuzah, or a statue of Buddha, etcetera, to the exclusion of other symbols \u2014 purchased with state funds, in every classroom.\u201d For that matter, a law erecting a cross on a courthouse or state capitol would also be allowed.<\/p>\n<p>To be clear, there are ample grounds for the Supreme Court not to adopt the 5th Circuit\u2019s standard. As another dissent points out, the court\u2019s abandonment of the Lemon test does not automatically nullify establishment clause bans that employ it, or render all its prongs null and void. The court could, for example, hold on to a requirement of secular purpose.<\/p>\n<p>What\u2019s clear, however, is that the 5th Circuit has opened the door to a degree of government endorsement of religion that goes well beyond anything the country has experienced since the last days of state religious establishments in the early 19th century. That ought to give all of us pause.<\/p>\n<p><!-- CONTENT END 1 -->\n        <\/div>\n<p><br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/religionnews.com\/2026\/04\/23\/the-radical-decision-letting-the-ten-commandments-be-posted-in-texas-classrooms\/\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>(RNS) \u2014 On Tuesday (April 21), the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave Texas the green light to require every public elementary and secondary school classroom in the state to display the King James Version\u2019s translation of the Ten Commandments. In its decision in Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, the court\u2019s 9-8 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7757,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7756","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7756","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7756"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7756\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7757"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7756"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7756"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}