Judge Blocks Louisiana Law Requiring Ten Commandments in Classrooms as ‘Unconstitutional’
Earlier this year, Louisiana became the first state to require that the Ten Commandments be displayed in all public school and college classrooms. Almost immediately, opponents of the law HB 71 threatened to sue on the grounds that it violated the Constitution. The legal battles are ongoing to this day.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge John deGravelles ruled to block the implementation of the law, claiming it is “unconstitutional on its face.” As part of his decision, deGravelles ordered that state education officials, including all local school boards, halt any enforcement of HB 71. According to the judge, the law is “overtly religious” and “discriminatory and coercive” in nature. But as Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said on Tuesday’s episode of “Washington Watch,” “[T]here are many people who disagree,” with Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill (R) being one of them.
“[W]e strongly disagree with the ruling,” she shared with Perkins, “but I can’t say that we were surprised by it. We actually anticipated this ruling so much that we filed our motion to stay with the district court judge before he ever ruled, and before the hearing,” so that once he made his decision “we could move it up the court of appeals immediately.” Perkins further explained how “the landscape for religious freedom and exercise in this country has changed significantly under the current Supreme Court,” noting that decisions have been made in recent days that could “open the door to revisiting what happened in 1980, when the court struck down the posting of Ten Commandments in the schools.”
“[T]his is a new era,” Perkins added, and “a return to the exercise of religious freedom.” From Perkins’s point of view, this could lead to a “pretty promising” landscape for the appeal “to make its way through.” Ultimately, Murrill emphasized that the Louisiana bill “meets the current constitutional standards.” Even if it didn’t, she continued, “then we will press that issue as well” by emphasizing the current precedent. However, she observed, “I believe that this law should have survived and does survive under current Supreme Court precedent, which allows us to post the Ten Commandments as long as it’s posted inside a historical context.”
With this in mind, Perkins noted that the hold on the law is more than likely “temporary.” But “what’s the timeline of the actual adjudication of this case before the court?” he asked. It’s “hard to say,” Murrill replied, especially since the judge “issued an injunction that gives him the benefit of time. He can sit as long as he likes.” She added that “we … would like to move it forward for a final ruling” sooner rather than later, even though Murrill feels the judge is unlikely to change his position.
However, she pointed out “that only five school boards were sued” and are “subject to the injunction.” Murrill explained that “it’s a misunderstanding of Louisiana law to treat the Bessie board as … having any legal control over all the other school boards in our state. They are separate political subdivisions, and they are not subject to the injunction.” This means, as Perkins highlighted, that “the vast majority of the state moves forward with adhering to this law that requires the posting of the Ten Commandments in the classroom.” And yet, because “schools are sensitive to being sued,” Murrill noted, this legal battle could “chill the conduct” of schools that may not be in the direct line of fire but are “fearful of being sued.”
As Murrill went on to argue, part of the reason many in Louisiana are fighting in this case is because “the law on its face is, in fact, constitutional. It tracks Supreme Court precedent.” The Ten Commandments are allowed to “be posted with other documents and placed in a historical context,” she clarified, but claims of the practice being “unconstitutional” have hampered the effort. Perkins contended that “it’s very important” to properly “articulate this because … the way the press reports” on this case makes it seem the entire state is trapped in the lawsuit “when in fact it’s just these five school boards.”
Murrill agreed, adding that the confusion is also due to the fact that “the judge actually went further and directed Cade Brumley, the state superintendent of education, to send notices out to all schools advising that the law has been declared unconstitutional. That’s not legally correct.” John deGravelles’s “ruling,” she concluded, “has no jurisdiction over … school boards” outside of the five defendants “at this time.”
Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.