Privacy Policy
Home | Money | Entertainment | Links | Advertise | Search | Cartoons | Contact | Shop November 23, 2009
Web
NewsMax.com
Powered by
 
Supreme Court to Hear Commandments Case
NewsMax.com Wires
Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2004
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court said Tuesday it would take up the constitutionality of Ten Commandments displays on government land and buildings, a surprise announcement that puts justices in the middle of a politically sensitive issue.

Justices have repeatedly refused to revisit issues raised by their 1980 decision that banned the posting of copies of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms.

Story Continues Below

  In the meantime, lower courts have reached a hodgepodge of conflicting rulings that allow displays in some instances but not in others.

The high court will hear an appeal early next year involving displays in Kentucky and Texas.

  • In the Texas case, the justices will decide if a Ten Commandments monument on the state Capitol grounds is an unconstitutional attempt to establish state-sponsored religion.

    A homeless man, Thomas Van Orden, lost his lawsuit to have the 6-foot-tall red granite removed. Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the monument to the state in 1961. The group gave scores of similar monuments to American towns during the 1950s and '60s, and those have been the subject of multiple court fights.

  • Separately, they will consider whether a lower court wrongly barred the posting of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses.

    McCreary and Pulaski county officials hung framed copies of the Ten Commandments in their courthouses and later added other documents, such as the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence, after the display was challenged.

    The Ten Commandments contain religious and secular directives, including the familiar proscriptions on stealing, killing and adultery. The Bible says God gave the list to Moses.

    (Actually It Says 'Congress Shall ...')

    The Constitution bars any state "establishment" of religion. That means the government cannot promote religion in general, or favor one faith over another.

    The lawyer for the Kentucky counties, Mathew Staver of the conservative law group Liberty Counsel, told justices that lower courts were fractured on the issue. A divided appeals court panel sided with American Civil Liberties Union in the Kentucky case.

    In the past decade, justices have refused to get involved in Ten Commandments disputes from around the country. Three conservative justices complained in 2001, when the court declined to rule on the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments display in front of the municipal building in Elkhart, Ind.

    Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, said the city sought to reflect the cultural, historical and legal significance of the commandments. Rehnquist noted that justices' own chambers included a carving of Moses holding the Ten Commandments.

    The cases are Van Orden vs. Perry, 03-1500 and McCreary County vs. ACLU, 03-1693.

    © 2004 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Editor's note:

  • Get David Limbaugh’s best seller "Persecution" about the war on Christians – Click Here for FREE offer

  • Home | Money | Entertainment | Links | Advertise | Search | Cartoons | Contact | Shop
    All Rights Reserved © 2009 NewsMax.Com

    103-103-103-103