Other Campus: Court redefines First Ammendment

By The Lantern

(U-WIRE) COLUMBUS, Ohio – The thin line between church and state became more clearly defined yesterday as the Supreme Court handed down two key decisions regarding permissible placements of the Ten Commandments.

In the first case, McCreary County v. ACLU, judges ruled 5-4 that two Kentucky courthouses went too far in endorsing religion and that those courthouse displays are unconstitutional because their religious content is overemphasized.

The court did leave room for future case-by-case decisions by citing that some displays inside courthouses would be allowable if they were portrayed neutrally in order to “honor the nation’s legal history.”

In Van Orden v. Perry, Chief Justice William Rehnquist led the court’s 5-4 decision ruling that “simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment clause.” Contrary to the striking down of overly religious displays in courtrooms in Kentucky, Van Orden paves the way for the acceptance of certain religious displays on government property.

In both cases the Supreme Court was very clear on what qualifies as a constitutional display of religious emblems. Items with a legitimate tribute to the nation’s legal and religious history are permissible to be displayed on government property and-in certain instances-courtrooms.

Get The Daily Illini in your inbox!

  • Catch the latest on University of Illinois news, sports, and more. Delivered every weekday.
  • Stay up to date on all things Illini sports. Delivered every Monday.
Thank you for subscribing!

Although the Supreme Court did not clearly define the separation of church and state, it strategically laid out the foundation for building a policy that adheres both to the First Amendment and to the changing political and religious landscapes.

Staff Editorial

The Lantern (Ohio State U.)