Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteappealtrial
statuteinjunctionwrit of certiorari

Related Cases

Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. 506, 1868 WL 11093, 19 L.Ed. 264, 7 Wall. 506
View Case »
Palko v. State of Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 58 S.Ct. 149, 82 L.Ed. 288
View Case »
McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Com’n, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d 426, 63 USLW 4279, 23 Media L. Rep. 1577
View Case »
State of Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 40 S.Ct. 382, 64 L.Ed. 641, 11 A.L.R. 984, 18 Ohio Law Rep. 61
View Case »
Thornhill v. State of Alabama, 310 U.S. 88, 60 S.Ct. 736, 84 L.Ed. 1093, 6 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 697, 2 Lab.Cas. P 17,059
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 101 S.Ct. 192, 66 L.Ed.2d 199

Facts

The case arose when a Kentucky statute mandated the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments in each public school classroom, financed by private contributions. Petitioners argued that this statute violated the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment. The state trial court upheld the statute, claiming its purpose was secular, but this was contested by the petitioners, leading to an appeal.

A Kentucky statute requires the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments, purchased with private contributions, on the wall of each public classroom in the State. Petitioners, claiming that this statute violates the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment, sought an injunction against its enforcement.

Issue

Did the Kentucky statute requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

Did the Kentucky statute requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

Rule

The court applied a three-part test from Lemon v. Kurtzman to determine if the statute had a secular legislative purpose, whether its primary effect advanced or inhibited religion, and whether it fostered excessive government entanglement with religion.

This Court has announced a three–part test for determining whether a challenged state statute is permissible under the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution: 'First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion …; finally the statute must not foster ‘an excessive government entanglement with religion.’ '

Analysis

The Supreme Court found that the Kentucky statute had no secular legislative purpose and was therefore unconstitutional. The Court noted that the preeminent purpose of posting the Ten Commandments was plainly religious, as the text is sacred in both Jewish and Christian faiths. The Court rejected the state's assertion of a secular purpose, stating that such claims could not obscure the religious nature of the Commandments.

We conclude that Kentucky's statute requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public schoolrooms had no secular legislative purpose, and is therefore unconstitutional.

Conclusion

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the judgment of the Kentucky Supreme Court, ruling that the statute was unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, and the judgment below is reversed.

Who won?

The petitioners prevailed in the case as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Kentucky statute violated the Establishment Clause due to its religious purpose.

The petitioners prevailed in the case as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Kentucky statute violated the Establishment Clause due to its religious purpose.

You must be