Latest news with #5thU.S.CircuitCourtofAppeals
Miami Herald
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Louisiana Classroom Ten Commandments Requirement Blocked by Court
A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday struck down Louisiana's requirement for displaying the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. Newsweek reached out to the office of Governor Jeff Landry via email on Saturday for comment. The ruling represents a decisive legal victory for advocacy groups challenging the state mandate on constitutional grounds. This constitutional challenge reflects broader national tensions over religious expression in public education, with the mandate previously receiving support from President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers. The ruling's implications extend beyond Louisiana, as Texas advances comparable legislation that affects nearly 6 million students in the nation's second-largest school system, while Arkansas faces parallel legal challenges as well. Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry enacted the classroom display requirement in June 2024, mandating poster-sized presentations of the Ten Commandments across all public-school facilities. The law was quickly challenged by parents of Louisiana school children from various religious backgrounds, who filed a lawsuit arguing it violates First Amendment language that guarantees religious liberty and forbidding government establishment of religion. The ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marked a major win for civil liberties groups who said the mandate violates the separation of church and state. The decision upholds an order issued last November by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles who declared the mandate unconstitutional and ordered state education officials not to enforce it. In a court with more than twice as many Republican-appointed judges, two of the three judges involved in Friday's ruling were appointed by Democratic presidents. Historical precedent shows the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that a Kentucky law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, finding it had no secular purpose but served a plainly religious purpose. In 2005, the Court held that displays in Kentucky courthouses violated the Constitution, while simultaneously upholding a Ten Commandments marker on the grounds of the Texas state Capitol in Austin. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) senior staff attorney Heather L. Weaver told the Associated Press: "This is a resounding victory for the separation of church and state and public education. With today's ruling, the Fifth Circuit has held Louisiana accountable to a core constitutional promise: Public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith." Americans United for Separation of Church and State spokesperson Liz Hayes told the AP: "All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution. Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms." Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry wrote in a statement on Friday: "The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our laws—serving both an educational and historical purpose in our classrooms." Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said she would appeal the ruling, including taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. Landry stated Friday that he supports the attorney general's plans to appeal. Reporting from the Associated Press contributed to this article. Related Articles Mahmoud Khalil Blasts Trump After Release: 'They Chose The Wrong Person'Trump Admin Gives Update on Using Military to Support ICE in 3 StatesMahmoud Khalil Cannot Be Detained or Deported, Judge RulesLouisiana Father Charged With Murder After Toddler Dies in Hot Car 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Newsweek
Louisiana Classroom Ten Commandments Requirement Blocked by Court
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday struck down Louisiana's requirement for displaying the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. Newsweek reached out to the office of Governor Jeff Landry via email on Saturday for comment. Why It Matters The ruling represents a decisive legal victory for advocacy groups challenging the state mandate on constitutional grounds. This constitutional challenge reflects broader national tensions over religious expression in public education, with the mandate previously receiving support from President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers. The ruling's implications extend beyond Louisiana, as Texas advances comparable legislation that affects nearly 6 million students in the nation's second-largest school system, while Arkansas faces parallel legal challenges as well. What To Know Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry enacted the classroom display requirement in June 2024, mandating poster-sized presentations of the Ten Commandments across all public-school facilities. The law was quickly challenged by parents of Louisiana school children from various religious backgrounds, who filed a lawsuit arguing it violates First Amendment language that guarantees religious liberty and forbidding government establishment of religion. The ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marked a major win for civil liberties groups who said the mandate violates the separation of church and state. The decision upholds an order issued last November by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles who declared the mandate unconstitutional and ordered state education officials not to enforce it. In a court with more than twice as many Republican-appointed judges, two of the three judges involved in Friday's ruling were appointed by Democratic presidents. Historical precedent shows the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that a Kentucky law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, finding it had no secular purpose but served a plainly religious purpose. In 2005, the Court held that displays in Kentucky courthouses violated the Constitution, while simultaneously upholding a Ten Commandments marker on the grounds of the Texas state Capitol in Austin. A Ten Commandments sculpture is on display in front of city hall June 27, 2001, in Grand Junction, Colorado. A Ten Commandments sculpture is on display in front of city hall June 27, 2001, in Grand Junction, People Are Saying American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) senior staff attorney Heather L. Weaver told the Associated Press: "This is a resounding victory for the separation of church and state and public education. With today's ruling, the Fifth Circuit has held Louisiana accountable to a core constitutional promise: Public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith." Americans United for Separation of Church and State spokesperson Liz Hayes told the AP: "All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution. Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms." Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry wrote in a statement on Friday: "The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our laws—serving both an educational and historical purpose in our classrooms." What Happens Next? Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said she would appeal the ruling, including taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. Landry stated Friday that he supports the attorney general's plans to appeal. Reporting from the Associated Press contributed to this article.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Undocumented students ask judge to let them challenge sudden loss of in-state tuition
A group of undocumented students on Wednesday asked a judge to let them intervene in a case that revoked their access to in-state tuition, the first step in their ultimate goal of overturning the ruling. The filing comes a week after the U.S. Department of Justice sued Texas over its 24-year-old law that allowed undocumented Texans who had lived in the state for three years and graduated from a Texas high school to qualify for lower tuition rates at public universities. Texas quickly agreed with the Trump administration's claim that the law was unconstitutional and asked a judge to find the law unenforceable. The quick turnaround — the whole lawsuit was resolved in less than six hours — represents a 'contrived legal challenge designed to prevent sufficient notice and robust consideration,' lawyers for these students argued in their motion. They're asking U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor to allow them to join the lawsuit and argue for why the statute should remain in effect. The Justice Department and the Texas attorney general's office oppose the motion on the grounds that the matter has been resolved and the case is terminated, court documents say. O'Connor, the George W. Bush appointee who blocked the law, has long been a favored judge for the Texas attorney general's office and conservative litigants. The Justice Department filed its lawsuit in the Wichita Falls division of the Northern District of Texas, where O'Connor hears all cases. The people who are most impacted by a lawsuit typically have a right to have their voices heard on a case, said David Coale, a Dallas appellate attorney. Getting O'Connor to agree to reopen might be a tough sell, he said, but if they're denied, they could appeal that ruling and the rest of the case alongside it, to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 'The 5th Circuit's obviously a very conservative court, but part of that conservatism is a pretty limited view of the judicial role,' Coale said. 'So if they get a chance to argue their case there … they may have some luck.' The law, which has been in effect since 2001, grants in-state tuition to anyone who has been living in the state for three years and graduated from a Texas high school. All students who claim this benefit must sign an affidavit saying they intend to become U.S. citizens as soon as they are able; many of them are here as part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The motion lays out the human impact of the law's sudden reversal — a man who is reconsidering his plans to go to medical school in Texas; a woman who will have to drop out of her masters program, where she was studying to become a counselor; a teacher-in-training who will have to delay her plans to graduate and begin working. They are represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which said in a press release that the abrupt overturning of the law has left students scrambling. 'What happened last week – the invalidation of longstanding state law in the course of one afternoon – was an abuse of our judicial system,' said MALDEF President Thomas A. Saenz. 'Those affected by the attempted invalidation have the right to be heard on the legality of the Texas Dream Act.' Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O'Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer. Get tickets. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
USA Today
02-06-2025
- Entertainment
- USA Today
Exotic dancer says strip clubs turned away Black dancers. Supreme Court won't get involved.
Exotic dancer says strip clubs turned away Black dancers. Supreme Court won't get involved. Show Caption Hide Caption Religious charter school case lands at Supreme Court SCOTUS hears religious charter school case WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on June 2 declined to take up a Black adult entertainer's attempt to sue several Houston-area strip clubs for alleged racial discrimination. Chanel Nicholson has accused the clubs of limiting the number of Black dancers on stage at one time. The lower courts dismissed her class action lawsuit saying she waited too long to bring her challenge. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that decision was "patently erroneous" and the Supreme Court should have intervened. But only one other justice, Sonia Sotomayor, agreed. More: Two men fought for jobs in a river-town mill. 50 years later, the nation is still divided. There's a four-year statute of limitations for claims brought under the federal law guaranteeing racial equality in contractual relationships and a federal district judge said that clock started in 2014 when Nicholson first began working at the clubs. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed that decision. Nicholson argues the clock reset every time she was turned away from the stage. In November of 2017, for example, she said she was barred from performing at one club after being told there were 'too many Black girls' working already. She filed her initial suit in 2021 after she said she was again discriminated against. Attorneys for the strip clubs say the statute of limitations applies unless the charge is a hostile work environment, which was not Nicholson's initial claim. Nicholson initially represented herself when filing her appeal but now has attorneys who say the lower courts are divided over whether the statute of limitations can also be waived when someone alleges a pattern of discrimination. Those are among the most important civil rights claims, her attorneys argue. And there should be no artificial cut off, they told the court, when the discriminatory act 'is ongoing and the reason for it is still visible in the mirror.'
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Exotic dancer says strip clubs turned away Black dancers. Supreme Court won't get involved.
WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on June 2 declined to take up a Black adult entertainer's attempt to sue several Houston-area strip clubs for alleged racial discrimination. Chanel Nicholson has accused the clubs of limiting the number of Black dancers on stage at one time. The lower courts dismissed her class action lawsuit saying she waited too long to bring her challenge. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that decision was "patently erroneous" and the Supreme Court should have intervened. But only one other justice, Sonia Sotomayor, agreed. More: Two men fought for jobs in a river-town mill. 50 years later, the nation is still divided. There's a four-year statute of limitations for claims brought under the federal law guaranteeing racial equality in contractual relationships and a federal district judge said that clock started in 2014 when Nicholson first began working at the clubs. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed that decision. Nicholson argues the clock reset every time she was turned away from the stage. In November of 2017, for example, she said she was barred from performing at one club after being told there were 'too many Black girls' working already. She filed her initial suit in 2021 after she said she was again discriminated against. Attorneys for the strip clubs say the statute of limitations applies unless the charge is a hostile work environment, which was not Nicholson's initial claim. Nicholson initially represented herself when filing her appeal but now has attorneys who say the lower courts are divided over whether the statute of limitations can also be waived when someone alleges a pattern of discrimination. Those are among the most important civil rights claims, her attorneys argue. And there should be no artificial cut off, they told the court, when the discriminatory act 'is ongoing and the reason for it is still visible in the mirror.' This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court rejects exotic dancer's racial discrimination case
