[Juckys precedent legal code, Def. Exh. 1 in Memorandum in Support of Defendants Motion to Dismiss in Civ. A. No. 99507,509 :317.2 Def. Exh. 9 in Memorandum in Support of Defendants Motion to Dismiss in Civ. A. No. 99507 (ED Ky.) (hereinafter Def. Exh. 9).
In each county, the hallway display was readily visible to county citizens who use the courthouse to conduct their civic business, to obtain or renew drivers
1983uckys
civil and criminal laws; that the Kentucky House of
Representatives had in 1993 voted unanimously
to
adjourn
in remembrance and honor of Jesus Christ,
the Prince of Ethics
As directed by the resolutions, the Counties expanded the displays of the Ten Commandments in their locations, presumably along with copies of the resolution, which instructed that it, too, be posted, id., at 9. In addition to the first displaysincolns696. 702703. The courtsa single religious text unaccompanied by any interpretation explaining its role as a foundational documentcan hardly be said to present meaningfully the story of this countrys religious traditions. 96 F. Supp. 2d, at 6866:317, th[y] neighbors wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is th[y] neighbours.850 ,
Judge Ryan dissented on the basis of wide recognition that religion, and the Ten Commandments in particular, have played a foundational part in the evolution of American law and government; he saw no reason to gainsay the Counties claim of secular purposes. Id., at 4724uckys
public schools, this Court recognized that the Commandments
are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian
faiths and held that their display in public classrooms
violated the First
Amendments bar against establishment of religion.
Stone, 449 U.S., at 41. Stone found a
predominantly religious purpose in the governments
posting of the Commandments, given their prominence as,9 and the secular purpose requirement alone may rarely be determinative , it nevertheless serves an important function.10 Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 75 (1985) (OCon16 (1947); Wallace v. Jaffree,
supra, at 53. When the government acts with the
ostensible and predominant purpose of advancing religion, it
violates
(1987) (Lemons
to
nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full
members of the political community, and an accompanying message
to adherents that they are insiders, favored
.451.
B
Despite the intuitive importance of official purpose to the realization of Establishment Clause values, the Counties ask us to abandon Lemonsn, 432 U.S. 333, 352353 fters heart of hearts. Wallace v. Jaffree,
supra, at 74 (OConnor, J., concurring in
judgment). The eyes that look to purpose belong to an60. And in Edwards, we relied on a statutes text and the detailed public comments of its sponsor, when we sought the purpose of a state law requiring creationism to be taught alongside evolution. 482 U.S., at 586588. In other cases, the government action itself bespoke the purpose, as in Abington, where the object of required Bible study in public schools was patently religious, 374 U.S., at 223224; governments action was held unconstitutional only because openly available data supported a commonsense conclusion that a religious objective permeated the governments legislatures governments characterization is, of course, entitled
to some deference. But it is nonetheless the duty of the
courts to distinguis[h] a sham secular purpose from a
sincere oneabamas224.12 See also Bowen v. Kendrick,
governments actions and competent to learn what history
has to show, Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v.
Doe, 530 U.S., at 308 (objective observer is familiar
with
III
This case comes to us on appeal from a preliminary injunction. We accordingly review the District Courts , cr 23.
In this second display, unlike the first, the Commandments were not hung in isolation, merely leaving the Counties purpose to emerge from the pervasively religious text of the Commandments themselves. Instead, the second version was required to include the statement of the governments purpose expressly set out in the county resolutions, and underscored it by juxtaposing the Commandments to other documents with highlighted references to God as their sole common element. The displays unstinting focus was on religious passages, showing that the Counties were posting the Commandments precisely because of their sectarian content. That demonstration of the governments objective was enhanced by serial religious references and the accompanying resolutions todays 89).n of City of New York, 397 U.S. 664 (1970), as a rejection of neutrality on its own terms, post, at 78,, 472 U.S., at 5254, and n. 38,). E.g., Everson, supra, at 8 (A large proportion of the early settlers of this country came here from Europe to escape [religious persecution])..,10. On the dissents view, it apparently follows that even rigorous espousal of a common element of this common monotheism, is consistent with the establishment ban.
But the dissents14615 (1992) (Souter, J., concurring) (tracing development of language).
The historical record, moreover, is complicated beyond the dissentsias dissents conclusion that its narrower view was the original understanding, post, at 23,99 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting), but at least religion has previously been treated inclusively. Todays dissentsomews Courts finding of a predominantly religious purpose behind the Counties third display, we affirm the Sixth Circuit in upholding the preliminary injunction.
It is so ordered.
1. We do not consider here a display of the Ten Commandments in schoolrooms in Harlan County, Kentucky, that was litigated in consolidated proceedings in the District Court and Court of Appeals. That display is the subject of a separate petition to this Court.
2. This text comes from a record exhibit showing the Pulaski County Commandments that were part of the Countys first and second displays. The District Court found that the displays in each County were functionally identical. 96 F. Supp. 2d 679, 682, n. 2 (ED Ky. 2000); 96 F. Supp. 2d 691, 693, n. 2 (ED Ky. 2000).
3.)
4.696,.
5.700.
6. Before the District Court issued the modified injunction, the Counties removed the label of King James Version and the citation to Exodus. 145 F. Supp. 2d 845, 847 (ED Ky. 2001).
7. The Court also found that the effect of the third display was to endorse religion because the reasonable observer will see one religious code placed alongside eight political or patriotic documents, and will understand that the counties promote that one religious code as being on a par with our nations most cherished secular symbols and documents and because the reasonable observer [would know] something of the controversy surrounding these displays, which has focused on only one of the nine framed documents: the Ten Commandments. Id., at 851, 852.
8.459. The dissent found no effect of endorsement because it concluded that a reasonable observer would only see that the County had merely acknowledged the foundational role of the Ten Commandments rather than endorsed their religious content. Id., at 479480.
9. Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 41 (1980) (per curiam); Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 5661 (1985); Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578, 586593 (1987); Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S., at 308309.
10..
11. Moreover, Justice OCon).
12. Stone found the sacred character of the Ten Commandments preeminent despite an avowed secular purpose to show their adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common Law . 449 U.S., at 3940, n. 1 (internal quotation marks omitted). And the Abington Court was unconvinced that music education or the teaching of literature were actual secular objects behind laws requiring public school teachers to lead recitations from the Lords Prayer and readings from the Bible. 374 U.S., at 273.
13. The dissent nonetheless maintains that the purpose test is satisfied so long as any secular purpose for the government action is apparent. Post, at 1819 .
14. One consequence of taking account of the purpose underlying past actions is that the same government action may be constitutional if taken in the first instance and unconstitutional if it has a sectarian heritage. This presents no incongruity, however, because purpose matters. Just as Holmessmess12. While posting the Commandments may not have the effect of causing greater adherence to them, an ostensible indication of a purpose to promote a particular faith certainly will have the effect of causing viewers to understand the government is taking sides.
15. We note that the only factor in the preliminary injunction analysis that is at issue here is the likelihood of the ACLUs success on the merits.
16. Although the Counties point out that the courthouses contained other displays besides the Ten Commandments, there is no suggestion that the Commandments display was integrated to form a secular display.
17. In Stone, the Commandments were accompanied by a small disclaimer: The secular application of the Ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common Law of the United States. 449 U.S., at 3940, n. 1 (internal quotation marks omitted).
18.).
19. Following argument in this case, in which the resolutions were discussed, the McCreary and Pulaski County Boards did repeal the resolutions, acts of obviously minimal significance in the evolution of the evidence.
20..
21..
22. The Counties grasp at McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420 (1961), but it bears little resemblance to this case. As noted supra, at 1213, McGowan held that religious purposes behind centuries-old predecessors of Marylands Sunday laws were not dispositive of the purposes of modern Sunday laws, where the legislature had removed much of the religious reference in the laws and stated secular and pragmatic justifications for them. 366 U.S., at 446452. districts football prayer policy). Thus, as in Santa Fe, it makes sense to examine the Counties latest action in light of [their] history of unconstitutional practices. Id., at 309.
23. The dissent notes that another depiction of Moses and the Commandments adorns this Courts east pediment. Post, at 23. But as with the courtroom frieze, Moses is found in the company of other figures, not only great but secular.
24. The dissent also maintains that our precedents show that a solo display of the Commandments is a mere acknowledgement of religion on par with the inclusion of a crčche or a menorah in a holiday display, or an officials. Crčches placed with holiday symbols and prayers by legislators do not insistently call for religious action on the part of citizens; the history of posting the Commandments expressed a purpose to urge citizens to act in prescribed ways as a personal response to divine authority.
25.25 (1992) (Souter, J., concurring). Homer nodded. Id., at 624, n. 5 (corrected in erratum at 535 U.S., at II).
26. There might, indeed, even have been some reservations about monotheism as the paradigm example. It is worth noting that the canonical biography of George Washington, the dissents primary exemplar of the monotheistic tradition, calls him a deist. J. Flexner, George Washington: Anguish and Farewell (17931799) 490 (1972) (Washingtons religious belief was that of the enlightenment: deism). It would have been odd for the First Congress to propose an Amendment with Religion Clauses that took no account of the Presidents religion. As with other historical matters pertinent here, however, there are conflicting conclusions. R. Brookhiser, Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington 146 (1996) (Washingtons God was no watchmaker). History writ small does not give clear and certain answers to questions about the limits of religion or establishment.