The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals convened on March 12, 2024, to hear arguments regarding lawsuits challenging the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools in Louisiana and Texas. The cases stem from legislation passed by both states requiring the religious text to be posted in school classrooms, an initiative that has sparked significant legal and public debate.
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry was the first to sign a law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments, followed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott. Following the enactment of these laws, several groups filed lawsuits in both states, claiming that the measures violate the constitutional separation of church and state. Courts in both Louisiana and Texas have so far ruled against the laws, blocking their implementation.
The Fifth Circuit previously ruled Louisiana’s law as “plainly unconstitutional,” prompting the state to request a full court review. During the hearing, both sides presented their arguments, with Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill expressing optimism about their chances. “I like our chances,” Murrill stated. “I don’t think we’d be here if we didn’t have a significant number of judges who disagreed with the panel decision.”
Murrill emphasized the discussions that took place regarding Supreme Court precedents and their implications for the cases. Regardless of the outcome, she indicated that an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is likely. “We have the better side of that argument,” she added, referring to the extensive preparation that went into illustrating their constitutional stance.
Landry also commented on the historical context of the debate, suggesting that the United States was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. He cited the phrase “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency, questioning why the display of the Ten Commandments in schools is contentious when religious references exist in other public domains. “Why can’t we just embrace the historical concepts of the Judeo-Christian principles that this nation was founded on?” Landry asked.
The lawsuits, identified as Rev. Roake v. Brumley in Louisiana and Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District in Texas, raise critical issues regarding religious freedom and the First Amendment. Organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), along with Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, are representing the plaintiffs, which comprise a diverse group of religious leaders and parents.
The ACLU argues that no federal court has ever upheld the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools. “The plaintiffs in both states are multifaith and nonreligious families who simply want their constitutional right to decide their children’s religious education respected by the government,” the ACLU stated. They contend that public schools should provide an inclusive environment for all students, regardless of their religious background.
Reverend Jeff Sims from Louisiana articulated concerns about the implications of state-endorsed religious displays. “I send my children to public school to learn math, English, science, art, and so much more – but not to be evangelized by the state into its chosen religion,” he said. Sims highlighted that such displays could foster the perception of religious favoritism and undermine values of inclusion and equality.
Rabbi Mara Nathan from Texas echoed these sentiments, asserting that while the Ten Commandments hold significant meaning for many, their presence in public school classrooms is inappropriate. “Children’s religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools,” Nathan stated.
As the Fifth Circuit deliberates, the outcomes of these cases could set important precedents regarding the separation of church and state in educational settings, with potential implications for similar disputes across the United States.
