Court blocks Louisiana law requiring schools to post Ten Commandments in classrooms
Gov. Jeff Landry on Wednesday signed a bill mandating the displays of the 10 Commandments in all Louisiana public schools. (Crystal Stevenson / American Press)
A panel of three federal appellate judges has ruled that a Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in each of the state's public school classrooms is unconstitutional.
The ruling Friday marked a major win for civil liberties groups who say the mandate violates the separation of church and state, and that the poster-sized displays would isolate students — especially those who are not Christian.
The mandate has been touted by Republicans, including President Donald Trump, and marks one of the latest pushes by conservatives to incorporate religion into classrooms. Backers of the law argue the Ten Commandments belong in classrooms because they are historical and part of the foundation of U.S. law.
The plaintiffs' attorneys and Louisiana disagreed on whether the appeals court's decision applied to every public school district in the state or only the districts party to the lawsuit.
'All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution,' said Liz Hayes, a spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which served as co-counsel for the plaintiffs.
The appeals court's rulings 'interpret the law for all of Louisiana,' Hayes added. 'Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms.'
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said she disagreed and believed the ruling only applied to school districts in the five parishes that were party to the lawsuit and that she would seek to appeal the ruling.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' order stems from a lawsuit filed last year by parents of Louisiana school children from various religious backgrounds, who said the law violates First Amendment language guaranteeing religious liberty and forbidding government establishment of religion.
The mandate was signed into law last June by Republican Gov. Jeff Landry.
The court's ruling backs an order issued last fall by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles, who declared the mandate unconstitutional and ordered state education officials not to take steps to enforce it and to notify all local school boards in the state of his decision.
Law experts have long said they expect the Louisiana case to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, testing the conservative court on the issue of religion and government.
In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a similar Kentucky law violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says Congress can 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion.' The high court found that the law had no secular purpose but served a plainly religious purpose.
In 2005, the Supreme Court held that such displays in a pair of Kentucky courthouses violated the Constitution. At the same time, the court upheld a Ten Commandments marker on the grounds of the Texas state Capitol in Austin.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Rhode Island lawmakers pass bill to ban sales of assault weapons
PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- Rhode Island's Democratic-controlled state House on Friday approved legislation that would ban the sale and manufacturing of many semiautomatic rifles commonly referred to as assault weapons. The proposal now heads to the desk of Democratic Gov. Dan McKee, who has said he supports assault weapons bans. If the bill is signed into law, Rhode Island will join 10 states that have some sort of prohibition on high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide and are now largely the weapon of choice among those responsible for most of the country's devastating mass shootings. Gun control advocates have been pushing for an assault weapons ban in Rhode Island for more than a decade. However, despite being a Democratic stronghold, lawmakers throughout the country's smallest state have long quibbled over the necessity and legality of such proposals. The bill only applies to the sale and manufacturing of assault weapons and not possession. Only Washington state has a similar law. Residents looking to purchase an assault weapon from nearby New Hampshire or elsewhere will also be blocked. Federal law prohibits people from traveling to a different state to purchase a gun and returning it to a state where that particular of weapon is banned. Nine states and the District of Columbia have bans on the possession of assault weapons, covering major cities like New York and Los Angeles. Hawaii bans assault pistols. Democratic Rep. Rebecca Kislak described the bill during floor debates Friday as an incremental move that brings Rhode Island in line with neighboring states. 'I am gravely disappointed we are not doing more, and we should do more," she said. "And given the opportunity to do this or nothing, I am voting to do something.' Critics of Rhode Island's proposed law argued that assault weapons bans do little to curb mass shootings and only punish people with such rifles. 'This bill doesn't go after criminals, it just puts the burden on law-abiding citizens,' said Republican Sen. Thomas Paolino. Republican Rep. Michael Chippendale, House minority leader, predicted that if the legislation were to become law, the U.S. Supreme Court would eventually deem it unconstitutional. 'We are throwing away money on this," he said. It wasn't just Republicans who opposed the legislation. David Hogg — a gun control advocate who survived the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida — and the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence described the proposed ban as the 'weakest assault weapons ban in the country.' 'I know that Rhode Islanders deserve a strong bill that not only bans the sale, but also the possession of assault weapons. It is this combination that equals public safety,' Hogg said in a statement. Elisabeth Ryan, policy counsel at Everytown for Gun Safety, rejected claims that the proposed law is weak. 'The weakest law is what Rhode Island has now, no ban on assault weapons,' Ryan said. 'This would create a real, enforceable ban on the sale and manufacture of assault weapons, just like the law already working in Washington state, getting them off the shelves of Rhode Island gun stores once and for all.' Nationally, assault weapons bans have been challenged in court by gun rights groups that argue the bans violate the Second Amendment. AR-15-style firearms are among the best-selling rifles in the country. The conservative-majority Supreme Court may soon take up the issue. The justices declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's assault weapons ban in early June, but three conservative justices — Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas — publicly noted their disagreement. A fourth, Brett Kavanaugh, indicated he was skeptical that the bans are constitutional and predicted the court would hear a case 'in the next term or two.'
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Rhode Island lawmakers pass bill to ban sales of assault weapons
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Rhode Island's Democratic-controlled state House on Friday approved legislation that would ban the sale and manufacture of many semiautomatic rifles commonly referred to as assault weapons. The proposal now heads to the desk of Democratic Gov. Daniel McKee, who has said he supports assault weapons bans. If the bill is signed into law, Rhode Island will join 10 other states that have some sort of prohibition on high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide and are now largely the weapon of choice among those responsible for most of the country's mass shootings. Gun control advocates have been pushing for an assault weapons ban in Rhode Island for more than a decade. But despite being a Democratic stronghold, lawmakers throughout the country's smallest state have long argued over the necessity and legality of such proposals. The bill applies only to the sale and manufacturing of assault weapons and not possession. Only Washington state has a similar law. Residents looking to purchase an assault weapon from nearby New Hampshire or elsewhere will also be blocked. Federal law prohibits people from traveling to a different state to purchase a gun and returning it to a state where that particular of weapon is banned. Nine states and the District of Columbia have bans on the possession of assault weapons, covering major cities including Los Angeles and New York. Hawaii bans assault pistols. Critics of Rhode Island's proposed law argued Friday during floor debates that assault weapons bans do little to curb mass shootings and only punish people with such rifles. 'This bill doesn't go after criminals, it just puts the burden on law-abiding citizens,' said Republican Sen. Thomas Paolino. It wasn't just Republicans who opposed the legislation. David Hogg — a gun control advocate who survived the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Fla. — and the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence described the proposed ban as the 'weakest assault weapons ban in the country.' 'I know that Rhode Islanders deserve a strong bill that not only bans the sale, but also the possession of assault weapons. It is this combination that equals public safety,' Hogg said in a statement. Elisabeth Ryan, policy counsel at Everytown for Gun Safety, rejected assertions that the proposed law is weak. 'The weakest law is what Rhode Island has now — no ban on assault weapons,' Ryan said. 'This would create a real, enforceable ban on the sale and manufacture of assault weapons, just like the law already working in Washington state, getting them off the shelves of Rhode Island gun stores once and for all.' Nationally, assault weapons bans have been challenged in court by gun rights groups that argue the bans violate the 2nd Amendment. AR-15-style firearms are among the bestselling rifles in the country. The conservative-majority Supreme Court may soon take up the issue. The justices declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's assault weapons ban in early June, but three conservative justices — Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas — publicly noted their disagreement. A fourth justice, Brett M. Kavanaugh, indicated he was skeptical that the bans are constitutional and predicted the court would hear a case 'in the next term or two.' Kruesi writes for the Associated Press. AP writers David Lieb in Jefferson City, Mo., and Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.
Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
User's manual to the Big, Beautiful Bill this weekend and early next week
Next week is crucial to passage of the Big, Beautiful Bill in the Senate. If things go well, the bill could be done by the end of next week. If things go poorly, the Senate may be crashing to finish the bill before July 4. That could involve weekend sessions and the cancellation of the July 4 recess. On Sunday, Senate Republicans huddle with Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough to whittle away provisions which don't comport with Senate budgetary rules. The Senate is using a special process known as "budget reconciliation" to avoid a filibuster. As a result, the bill must be fiscal in nature and not add to the deficit. It cannot include "policy." This is known as the "Byrd Rule." It's named after late Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd (D-W.V.). The process of meeting with the Parliamentarian is the "Byrd Bath." MacDonough serves as a referee to decide what fits with Senate budget rules. The various provisions which MacDonough fillets from the bill are called "Byrd droppings." Anyway, despite the cornpone Senate humor, the process offstage on Sunday is crucial to the process. What's ruled in or out could bolster chances of passing the bill – or kill it. We will start to get information about what is ruled in or out over the weekend and stretching into Monday. Those policy details will be critical. So watch for leaks and other information to dribble out beginning on Sunday. This process will roll into early next week with an initial vote to begin the process mid-week. It will culminate with a round-the-clock voting session (known as a "vote-a-rama") late next week. Then the measure must go back to the House. That's because the Senate will inevitably change the bill. The House and Senate must be aligned before the bill can go to the president's desk. And this is why the deadline to finish the bill by July 4 may slip.
