This law is of course unconstitutional under Stone v Graham but passed purposely to give the Fifth Circuit an opportunity to ignore it, triggering Supreme Court review and Stone’s overrule.
The current majority will apply a coercion test, and they will find this advisory (honest to god, I'll bet they use that word) or hortatory, not coercive.
The Kentucky legislature mandated hanging the Commandments in classrooms but crafted the statute so as to dodge the Lemon Test. It didn’t work, and the Burger Court struck it down. The Alito Court will almost certainly overrule it now that it has an opportunity. supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...
Seems really hard to get Gorsuch and Roberts in line with this. Is there some sort of "originalist" theory that FedSoc has handed down that would make "Thou shalt have no God before Yahweh" legally protected government speech?
I wonder why they aren’t as intent on displaying Jesus beatitudes. After all they are allegedly “Christians”. But of course that is an question for another day.
love it when my state decides it’s fiscally responsible to do this kinda crap when we’re hearing all about next year’s fiscal cliff, on top of the blatantly unconstitutional thing. grumble grumble
This is an unconstitutional law which means certain members of the SCOTUS have broken their vow to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America which means they are traitors & the punishment for that is Death.