Attorneys Ready for Historic Ten Commandments Proceedings
by Allie Martin
March 1, 2005
(AgapePress) - The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to hear oral arguments tomorrow (Wednesday) in a case that many believe will set the course for the future interpretation of the First Amendment.Justices on the high court will hear arguments on two cases involving the public display of the Ten Commandments. The Texas case of Van Orden v. Perry will be heard first, followed by the Kentucky cases in McCreary County v. The ACLU of Kentucky. Van Orden v. Perry involves a display of the Commandments on State Capitol grounds. The Kentucky cases involve displays of God's laws in two courthouses along with other historical and legal documents.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs are expected to tell the high court that the displays are an unconstitutional endorsement of religion under the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. On the other side, defenders will argue that the displays merely acknowledge the contribution of the Ten Commandments to the nation's law and government.
| | 
Erik Stanley |
Erik Stanley of Liberty Counsel has been assisting Mat Staver, LC's president and general counsel, for months in preparation for the oral arguments. Stanley says the outcome will determine whether government properly acknowledges the nation's heritage and history."Depending on how they rule," Stanley says, "it could affect everything from other Ten Commandments displays that are currently up, [and] crosses in cemeteries honoring veterans. And if the court does strike down this display, we believe that all of those acknowledgements of religion are fair game."
Stanley also expects the ruling will chart the future course of First Amendment interpretation. As he points out, the high court has never heard oral arguments on the constitutionality of displaying the Ten Commandments.
"They ruled against the Ten Commandments in 1980 in Stone v. Graham, but they never had briefing in that case, and they never had oral arguments," he says. "So this will be the first time that the constitutionality of government displaying the Ten Commandments is going to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. Our case also involves the question of what is the proper test for the court to be using in these Establishment Clause cases."
Mat Staver | |
Staver, who will present oral arguments in the Kentucky case, plans to argue that the displays do not constitute a government endorsement of religion when exhibited in public displays. In fact, he notes, the environment into which he walks to present the case offers a perfect example."[W]hen I walk through the double doors leading to the Supreme Court's chambers, I will see the Ten Commandments," Staver says. "The engraved Ten Commandments on the Court's double wooden door entrance and the bronze gates to the side exits, or Moses holding the Ten Commandments in Hebrew script inside the chambers, have not established a religion."
The Ten Commandments, he says, are a "universally recognized symbol of law that has influenced our laws, our government and even our common vernacular. Displaying them in a courthouse is a permissible acknowledgment of religion and of the role religion has played in shaping our nation."
Decisions in both cases are expected from the Supreme Court in June.
Allie Martin, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
