State laws that require the ten commandments in public school classes in court continue to lose in court, but this is not significant if they win at the highest court in the country.
External supporters believe that followers of laws in Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas actively try to maintain the cases in front of the Supreme Court. In the meantime, however, these supporters are suffer consistently legal lossesincluding some of the most conservative courts in the country.
Complain have questioned the lawswho exploit a similar language to mandate posters from the ten commandments, on the grounds that they violate the rights of the students and the first change in the parents. However, followers believe that this is a top court who will see them differently.
“I don’t think someone is surprised that these guidelines, these laws in the states, who try to bring the ten commandments back to schools, have been challenged in court.
The so-called lemon test, which was previously used to determine whether a measure against the establishment clause against the decision of the school district 2022 2022, was violated against Bremerton school district, which stated that a public school soccer coach was injured in the first change after he was suspended after prayers.
“I think as soon as you have thrown the lemon test and introduced this history and tradition test, there is really no way to do this, which was decided as part of the Lemon test-the Supreme Court who talked about being completely resolved, and so they have given us the history and tradition test, but it has not been necessarily awarded in recent years,” said Krause.
“I think this case gives ten commandments to the judges the opportunity to offer even more a framework for what they started in Kennedy,” he added.
If the US Court of Appeal is considered the 5th circle, which is considered the most conservative court in the country, ruled last month It indicated that Louisiana’s ten law law is unconstitutional, “it is alone to overwrite one of his precedents.”
However, the opponents of the laws say that it is not a complete deal.
“The problem is, I just don’t think [proponents] Act of a misunderstanding, ”said Bob Tuttle, professor of law and religion at George Washington University Law School.
“The people who won the case in Kennedy against Bremerton School District have called the school districts and informed the school district that all possible things had now changed in the law, and they were free to bring religion back to public schools, and that was not at all,” added Tuttle.
The 6-3 majority conservative judges have assumed Right concerns about religion and educationincluding this term when you ruled by ideological direction In favor of parents who tried to remove their children from lessons, which included books with LGBTQ theme.
But The High Court also rejected The nation’s first openly religious charter school in a 4: 4 decision after the judiciary Amy Coney Barrett had withdrawn.
“I don’t think the Supreme Court will see this, and if you would see it, they would be forced to make a choice. I think they would be forced to face the radical changes in the establishment clause that influence the lessons in schools,” said Tuttle.
Others argue that there have been signs throughout the process that the Republicans wanted to create a friendlier court to enforce this type of legislation.
Emily Witt, Senior Communication and Media Strategist of Texas Freedom Network, pointed out that the legislator rejects all changes to the ten bore laws in addition to one in which the Attorney General would have to represent the school districts if the law was questioned.
“I think that says that you expect this legislation to lead to a lawsuit that is an abuse of taxpayers and also says that you are trying to say goodbye that is not constitutional,” said Witt.
“In this case, from our point of view, there was a decades of strategy for stacking the dishes to say goodbye to laws that have to go through legal proceedings because it really tests the limits of the constitution, and so that this is a great concern for us that this is the highest court and unfortunately … [it] Could prevail in a way that, from our point of view, does not respect our constitution, ”she added.
