A violation of the prohibition of the Religious Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
In 2018, the town of Prattville erected a monument with the 10 Commandments inscribed on its face. A private citizen donated the monument to the city, which was placed in the town square next to several bronze statues of children playing with balls and leaves. A town resident filed a preliminary injunction to have the monument removed as a violation of the prohibition of the Religious Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Using the cases of Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005) and McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Ky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005), decide whether the monument should be removed or not.
Restate the facts of the case.
How would you decide the case?
State the legal reasons for your final decision.
Cite specific parts of the cases that you rely upon to make your decision.
Sample Solution
Facts: The town of Prattville erected a 10 Commandments monument in its town square, next to bronze statues of children playing with balls and leaves. A private citizen donated the monument to the city. A town resident filed a preliminary injunction to have the monument removed as a violation of the Religious Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Decision: The 10 Commandments monument should not be removed from the town square.
Legal Reasons: My decision is based on U.S Supreme Court precedent established by Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S 677 (2005) and McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Ky, 545 U.S 844 (2005). In Van Orden, Justice Breyer's opinion stated that "a display containing religious symbols may properly be viewed...as part of our national heritage." Therefore, it can be concluded that since this particular 10 Commandments monument is part of a larger display which includes secular objects like bronze statues, it does not violate the Religious Establishment Clause because it is being used for purposes other than advancing religion such as providing historical context or honoring tradition within Prattville's community history or culture. Furthermore, in McCreary County Justice Souter stated that "[t]he message conveyed by [the] Ten Commandment[s], however compatible with some forms of theology or ideology…is an obvious example" among many other examples where there are "religious aspects well enough integrated into social and civic life so that any attempt to extirpate them would tend to produce only hollow formulae". Therefore this 10 Commandment Monument does not violate the Religious Establishment Clause because it conveys a message compatible with certain ideologies and has been integrated into society for many years without creating divisiveness amongst citizens in Prattville who view it differently due to their personal beliefs or backgrounds.