There is no question that Moore is a polarizing figure. I try hard to distinguisn between the act and the actor. If you can get past that and just ask, is it per se unconstitutional to have a display of the Ten Commandments in a public place, and if so why, the discussion can get away from personality and back to the real issue.
And what is the real issue? It is, IMO, whether the display violates the first amendment of the Constitution.
Actually, one thing I realized re-reading the Amendment in light of this exchange: the Amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . " Now, we realize that the SC, probably in violation of the intent of the 14th Amendment, has nonetheless extended this prohibition to the States, which is probably itself not a constitutionally valid principle. But let that pass. The plain words of the Amendment are that "Congress [State legislatures] shall make no law . . . "
In this case, nobody made any law of any kind. Neither Congress nor the State Legislature acted in any way. the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court made a decision about a decoration to be placed in the Courthouse. I can't see any way in which that violates the plain language of the Constitution. Can you? |
