The Foundation won the district case. The county appealed,
and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on the case in 2018. The
appeals court opted to wait till after the pending Supreme Court case American Legion v. American Humanist
Association. On June 20th, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of
the American legion, reversing a 4th Circuit Court of Appeals decision for the
removal of a World War 1 memorial cross due to an establishment clause
challenge based on the Lemon test. The Lemon test was based on a Supreme
Court case decided in 1972 that established rules to determine what defined
establishment of religion. Due to this decision, the Appeals Court ruled that
the Foundation and residents challenging the monument did not effectively show
any evidence of discrimination to other religious viewpoints or significant
promotion of a certain religious denomination, and therefore had no case
against the longstanding seal.
The county stated that the decision further solidifies the
Constitutional right for communities to “maintain religious symbols in public
places in recognition of the role of religion in their history and culture”.
The Foundation released their statement to local news outlets, arguing that the
decision “rules that the majority can trample the First Amendment in the name
of their religion”. This is the first case decided utilizing the new religious
establishment rules created in American Legion v. American Humanist Association.
Clearly, this case is a first look into how the American
Legion case will change religious establishment cases across the country. The
decision displays a key challenge for the Supreme Court that, in this case,
they have succeeded in completing effectively: fixing past decisions that left
gray areas on decisive modern debates. The 1972 Lemon case set a
precedent negatively effecting future court proceedings determining
establishment of religion for nearly 50 years. The three guidelines employed in
the Lemon test to establish if something violated the First Amendment included
a required secular purpose for all legislative doctrine and court decisions, a
primary effect that did not advance (nor, notably inhibit) religion, and a
requirement that any magistrate may not foster an, “excessive government
entanglement with religion”. Originally, the Lemon test was applied for
legislation, and therefore effectively stripped any law created with religious
preference or suppression. As cases were brought about that utilized the
decision to refer to monuments and landmarks, the obvious need to define
various gray areas in the decision become outwardly apparent to law makers and
judges.
The aspect challenged in the American Legion case is the
application of the test to monuments and longstanding structures with
denominational significance. The Freedom From Religion Foundation attempts to
apply this ruling to a historical and cultural symbol used by a civil
authority. Although comparable to the decision about the World War 1 monument,
the case questions the allowance of a symbol, rather than a physical monument.
In the opinion of the court (and myself), this difference is insignificant in
shaping the characterization of a historical feature of a magistrate that does
not negatively effect or positively promote any religion or its teachings.
Although the Latin cross shown in the seal has undeniable Christian roots, the
many years it has been in existence and used as a proud symbol of the county
has allowed its connotation to expand to represent the county’s history itself.
As articulated by Circuit Judge Thomas Hardiman in his panel decision, “the
seal has become a familiar, embedded feature of Lehigh County, attaining a
broader meaning than any one of its many symbols.”
The Supreme Court decision has been criticized as a slippery
slope for religious establishment in state and municipal governments.
Personally, I think this attitude critically misses the key factors of the
decision stating the sole focus of the precedent: historical structures with
cultural significance. Where would the “slope” go? The decision is clear,
concise, and indisputably just for all religious denominations represented in
United States history. Both the Supreme Court and the 4th Appeals
Court followed the rights granted in the first amendment and avoided the
slippery slope of establishment of religion.
No comments:
Post a Comment