Texas May Display Ten Commandments in Public Classrooms

NEW ORLEANS, LA – The full U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 9-8 to allow Texas to display the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms across the state. The ruling in Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District lifts a lower court block on Texas’ 2025 Ten Commandments law (SB 10) that had passed 82-46 in the state House and 20-11 in the state Senate.

In January, the Fifth Circuit heard oral arguments in this case alongside a similar case involving Louisiana’s Ten Commandments law. The Court dismissed Louisiana’s case as “premature” since the case hinged on yet unresolved questions about how its Ten Commandments displays will be presented in the classrooms, which allowed Louisiana’s law to remain in effect for the time being. However, the Court found that Texas’ law, due to its clear, “uniform” requirements, could be decided and determined the law “does not violate either the Establishment Clause or the Free Exercise Clause.”

The Fifth Circuit summarized its reasoning stating that modern Establishment Clause analysis no longer applies the “Lemon test” or the previous Kentucky Ten Commandments case Stone v. Graham, but instead looks to historical significance and whether a law resembles a founding‑era understanding of religious establishment. Applying that approach, the court concludes that the classroom display requirement does not amount to religious establishment or religious coercion and does not substantially burden students’ or parents’ religious exercise.

“S.B. 10 looks nothing like a historical religious establishment,” wrote Circuit Judge Stuart K. Duncan, writing for the majority. “S.B. 10 requires no religious exercise or observance. Students are neither catechized on the Commandments nor taught to adopt them. Nor are teachers commanded to proselytize students who ask about the displays or contradict students who disagree with them.”

“It puts a poster on a classroom wall,” Judge Duncan continued. “Yes, Plaintiffs have sincere religious disagreements with its content. But that does not transform the poster into a summons to prayer. Because the Texas law has none of the elements of a founding-era establishment of religion, the district court erred in ruling that the law violates the Establishment Clause.”

Even though the Fifth Circuit dismissed the Louisiana case, Circuit Judge James Ho writing a concurring opinion with the majority in that case, noted the idea of a passive Ten Commandments display is not coercive and therefore does not violate the Establishment Clause and is “fully consistent with the Constitution.”

Recent Supreme Court precedents show that displaying the Ten Commandments is not necessarily a religious endorsement. In American Legion v. American Humanists Association, the High Court wrote that the Ten Commandments “have historical significance as one of the foundations of our legal system” and represents a “common cultural heritage.” Then, in 2022, the cases of Shurtleff v. City of Boston and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District rejected and overruled the 1971 case of Lemon v. Kurtzman. The High Court replaced the “Lemon Test” by returning to a traditional First Amendment standard where courts must interpret the Establishment Clause by “reference to historical practices and understandings.”

Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The Fifth Circuit has rightly ruled that the Ten Commandments can be displayed in public schools. Passive Ten Commandments displays do not compel religious exercise, so there is no Establishment Clause violation. The Decalogue is a universally recognized symbol of law and has indelibly shaped the Western Legal Tradition and American government. There are more than 50 displays of the Ten Commandments inside and outside the United States Supreme Court. The Ten Commandments are ubiquitous and their central role in law and government pre-date the U.S. Constitution and these displays honor its historical significance to our way of life.”

Support Canada Free Press