Three U.S. states passed laws that require the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. Texas passed the most recent law. Louisiana and Arkansas acted earlier. Each law demands schools place the Commandments in a clear and visible spot.
Lawmakers defend these measures as historical. They say the Commandments helped form the legal foundation of the West. They believe students should learn these values as part of American heritage. Supporters also claim the displays promote character and discipline.
Opponents reject these claims. They say public schools should not display religious texts. They argue that government must stay neutral on matters of faith. Many critics point to the First Amendment. It bars the state from establishing any religion. They see these laws as a direct violation.
Lawsuits quickly followed. Parents and advocacy groups filed legal challenges in all three states. They argue that these laws insert religion into public education. They say students who follow other faiths—or no faith—could feel judged or excluded. They believe the laws threaten religious liberty.
Courts have begun to review the cases. Some judges issued orders to block the laws. State leaders continue to defend their position. They say the current Supreme Court may support their view.
The Supreme Court has not yet stepped in. But rising legal pressure may force a review. A final decision could shape how religion appears in public classrooms for years to come.
Why States Are Posting the Ten Commandments
Texas passed a law that mandates the Ten Commandments in every classroom. Louisiana and Arkansas did the same earlier. Lawmakers say the Commandments reflect American history. They argue the displays promote values, not religion.
Parents across faiths have filed lawsuits. They believe these laws violate the First Amendment. They say students will face religious pressure in classrooms. They see the displays as forced religious exposure.
The Legal Fight Has Deep Roots
The Supreme Court already ruled on this issue in 1980. In Stone v. Graham, the court struck down a Kentucky law. That law required the Ten Commandments in public schools. The court said the law promoted religion. It failed to serve a secular purpose.
The decision used the Lemon test. This test came from Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971. It asked three things:
-
Does the law serve a secular purpose?
-
Does it promote or limit religion?
-
Does it create too much link between church and state?
The Kentucky law failed the first question. The court found its purpose clearly religious. It rejected the claim that the law had a historical goal.
The Supreme Court Shifted in 2022
The legal landscape changed in 2022. In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the court ruled in favor of a high school coach. He had prayed on the football field after games. The school punished him. The court said that punishment violated his rights.
That ruling changed everything. The court removed the Lemon test. It told judges to rely on history and the Founders’ views. This shift opened the door for new laws like those in Texas and Louisiana.
Lower Courts Still Resist
Some courts have blocked these laws. A federal judge stopped Louisiana’s policy. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that block. The judges said only the Supreme Court can reverse its own rulings.
Louisiana officials pushed back. They asked the full court to reconsider. They argued that the court misused the Lemon test. That request is still pending.
Past Cases Show the Divide
In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled on two Ten Commandments cases. The first was McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky. The court blocked courthouse displays. It said the displays had no secular goal.
The second case was Van Orden v. Perry. The court allowed a monument outside the Texas Capitol. The justices saw it as historical, not religious.
Justice Stephen Breyer supported the monument. But he warned that schools are different. Young children are more likely to feel pressure. Still, he said banning all religious displays would show hostility toward religion.
Who Backs These Laws?
Conservative leaders support these laws. Governor Greg Abbott (Texas), Governor Jeff Landry (Louisiana), and Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Arkansas) pushed the measures. They say the Ten Commandments reflect shared moral values.
Groups like WallBuilders, led by David Barton, helped draft these bills. They argue the Commandments shaped Western law. Groups like the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State oppose the laws. They say the displays promote religion in a public space.
What the Supreme Court May Decide
The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett often back public displays of religion. They back broader rights for faith-based displays in government settings.
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh take a more careful path. They favor religious liberty but may avoid broad rulings. They often aim to protect the court’s image and legal balance. Their votes could limit the impact of the decision.
The court may follow the approach from Van Orden v. Perry. That case upheld a Ten Commandments monument outside the Texas Capitol. The justices said the display had legal and historical value. They saw it as a symbol of law, not a religious message.
If the court uses that same reasoning, states may win. The justices could say the classroom displays reflect history, not faith. They could frame the Ten Commandments as part of America’s legal roots.
Such a ruling would give states more freedom. It would shift the court away from past limits on religious content. Schools might see more room to post moral or faith-based material. The Lemon test is gone. The new focus is history, not neutrality.
But the outcome is still unknown. The court has not taken the case yet. Legal pressure is building. A ruling could come soon—and it could reshape the future of religion in public schools.
Disclaimer: This article shares public information on “Supreme Court Approve” and does not offer legal advice or promote any legal service. If you have any questions about this, please don’t hesitate to contact us.
The Stakes Are High
A ruling in favor of the states could shift how courts interpret the First Amendment. Judges may no longer block religious displays based on old tests. The focus would shift to historical tradition instead of strict neutrality.
Lawmakers in other states may pass similar laws. They would likely point to this ruling as support. Schools could see more religious content as a result.
Critics warn of serious risks. They say the ruling could weaken the line between church and state. They believe it could isolate students who do not share the same beliefs.
Supporters argue the Constitution allows public recognition of faith. They claim schools should reflect the moral roots of the nation. They see this as a chance to protect religious freedom.
This decision will shape more than classroom policy. It will guide how the country views religion in public life. The impact will last for years
