Texas can't require the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, judge says
A group of Dallas-area families and faith leaders sought a preliminary injunction against the law, which goes into effect on Sept. 1. They say the requirement violates the First Amendment's protections for the separation of church and state and the right to free religious exercise.
Texas is the largest state to attempt such a requirement, and U.S. District Judge Fred Biery's ruling from San Antonio is the latest in a widening legal fight that's expected to eventually go before the U.S. Supreme Court.
'Even though the Ten Commandments would not be affirmatively taught, the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer. That is what they do," Biery wrote in the 55-page ruling that began with quoting the First Amendment and ended with "Amen."
The lawsuit names the Texas Education Agency, state education Commissioner Mike Morath and three Dallas-area school districts as defendants.
A federal appeals court has blocked a similar law in Louisiana, and a judge in Arkansas told four districts they cannot put up the posters, although other districts in the state said they're not putting them up either.
Although Friday's ruling marked a major win for civil liberties groups who say the law violates the separation of church and state, the legal battle is likely far from over.
Religious groups and conservatives say the Ten Commandments are part of the foundation of the United States' judicial and educational systems and should be displayed. Texas has a Ten Commandments monument on the Capitol grounds and won a 2005 Supreme Court case that upheld the monument.
In Louisiana — the first state that mandated the Ten Commandments be displayed in classrooms — a panel of three appellate judges in June ruled that the law was unconstitutional.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Texas Republicans bring redistricting bill to house floor after finally reaching quorum
Texas Republicans brought a bill to the floor of the state legislature on Wednesday to redraw the state's congressional districts, making quick use of their regained quorum after the return of protesting Democratic legislators. Democratic state representatives filed a series of amendments to the bill which were voted down, but used the process to raise objections to taking up redistricting before flood relief, to house rules which require a police escort when leaving the chamber and to the proposal itself, a mid-decade change which they argue reduces the voting power of people of color in service to Republican political gains and further gerrymanders the state at the cost of democracy. 'We're ready to meet Trump where he is, which is on a dirt road,' said Democrat Nicole Collier, livestreaming from a bathroom off the legislative floor. 'We're ready to get down and dirty.' Collier refused to sign a pass and permit a police escort for leaving the House floor, and has been trapped in the chambers as a result. While on a Zoom call with the Democratic senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and the Democratic National Committee chair, Ken Martin, Collier said she was being told she had to end the live stream or face a felony charge, abruptly leaving the meeting. It is emblematic of the unusual resistance Democrats in Texas have put up to the redistricting bill, and the response of the Republican-controlled Texas government to that resistance. 'This bill intentionally discriminates against Black and Hispanic Texans and other Texans of color by cracking and packing minority communities across the state of Texas,' said Chris Turner, a Democratic representative from Arlington. 'It is a clear violation of the Voting Rights Act and the constitution.' Republican leaders rejected racial animus as an element of the redistricting, noting that it increases the number of districts with a Hispanic voting age majority from seven to eight. Based on voting results from 2024, five congressional seats would change party from Democratic to Republican under the new map, which they argue is legally allowed. 'You want transparency,' said representative Todd Hunter, the Corpus Christi Republican who drafted the redistricting bill. 'The underlying goal of this plan is straightforward: improve Republican political performance … We are allowed to draw congressional districts on the basis of political performance, as recognized by the US supreme court in Rucho v Common Cause. These districts were drawn primarily using political performance to guide the redrawing of districts.' The strong assertion that the genesis of the redistricting is about increasing the number of Republicans in Congress, and not to diminish the voting power of people of color, is an early defense to expected legal challenges to the proposal under the Voting Rights Act. 'When you say the word 'redistricting', I think you know there are going to be legal challenges,' Hunter said. Under the Voting Rights Act and longstanding court precedent, lawmakers needed to draw lines with great awareness of the racial composition of the electorate in order to avoid unconstitutionally packing them into single districts to reduce their influence on other districts, or to spread them across multiple districts – cracking – to dilute their voting strength as a group. Talk of a mid-decade redistricting began in Texas after the Department of Justice circulated a letter describing the use of race in the state's 2021 redistricting to be unconstitutional. Texas's governor, Greg Abbott, seized on this as a rationale to redraw district lines more advantageous to Republicans. Donald Trump has called for Texas and other states to redraw their lines for more partisan advantage, prompting California's governor, Gavin Newsom, and other Democratic governors to begin to counter with redistrictings of their own. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Democrats in the Texas house left the state last month, intent on denying a quorum to the legislature to block a vote on the redistricting bill. They abandoned their exile after the California legislature began advancing a redistricting bill of its own. In contentious discussion, state representative Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, ranking Democrat on the Texas house redistricting committee, pressed Hunter on the motivations behind the new map lines and on the absence of input from the Texas legislative into a map that would probably face a voting rights challenge. That drew a sharp response from Hunter. 'You left 17 to 18 days! You could have sat with me,' Hunter said. 'Now you're getting on the microphone saying why didn't I involve you? Well, I wasn't going to cross state lines to find ya! I was here … You own the walkout. You said you did that. But don't come into this body and say we didn't include you. You left us for 18 days.'
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Judge shoots down Trump DOJ bid to unseal Epstein grand jury notes as ‘diversion' from releasing real Epstein files
The Department of Justice has struck out with all its requests to federal judges to unseal grand jury transcripts and other materials related to Jeffrey Epstein. A judge in New York on Wednesday denied the government's request to unseal the documents, noting that the content of grand jury transcripts in the sex offender's trafficking case 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials' already in the hands of the Justice Department. District Judge Richard Berman, who presided over Epstein's case before he died in his jail cell in 2019, agreed with another judge who last week had called the government's request a 'diversion' tactic to distract from public pressure against Donald Trump's administration to release the so-called Epstein files. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Berman wrote on Wednesday. 'By comparison, the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government's possession,' he added. 'The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Wednesday's ruling follows a judge's rejection of the Justice Department's request for grand jury documents in the case against Epstein's associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges tied to Epstein's crimes. In his 31-page opinion on August 11, District Judge Paul Engelmayer said nothing new would be revealed from the documents, and the public would instead 'come away feeling disappointed and misled.' Last month, Florida District Judge Robin Rosenberg said her 'hands are tied' when it comes to laws governing the release of grand jury transcripts, noting that the government's request falls outside the bounds of narrow exceptions. 'The government's request is not to assist with litigation in the New York federal proceedings,' she wrote. 'The government wants the petition to be granted so that it can release evidence to the public at large.'
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Texas judge blocks Ten Commandments in public schools with epic ruling that quotes Sonny & Cher, Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Graham
A federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked state law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, setting up a possible Supreme Court showdown after several Republican-led states have tried, and failed, to implement similar laws. The Texas law, which was set to take effect September 1, likely violates the First Amendment's prohibitions against government interference and endorsement of religion, according to Tuesday's order from District Judge Fred Biery. His colorful 55-page ruling quotes from Sonny & Cher, Greta Garbo and Kurt Vonnegut as well as Supreme Court rulings, historians and prominent faith leaders, from Billy Graham and Pat Robertson to the Buddha. 'Ultimately, in matters of conscience, faith, beliefs and the soul, most people are Garbo-esque,' he wrote, referencing her line 'I want to be alone' from the film Grand Hotel. 'They just want to be left alone, neither proselytized nor ostracized, including what occurs to their children in government-run schools.' Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will appeal, his office told The Independent. Under legislation approved by Texas lawmakers and signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year, all public elementary or secondary schools must 'display in a conspicuous place in each classroom of the school a durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments.' A lawsuit was filed by a group of Texas families with Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Unitarian Universalist, and nonreligious backgrounds, including clergy, with children in public schools. The judge agreed with plaintiffs that those displays 'are likely to pressure' children 'into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption' of the state's favored religious doctrine while 'suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs,' according to the judge. Biety also agreed that 'these matters of individual conscience and the soul should be free of government interference and coercion.' The Ten Commandment won't necessarily be taught in schools, but 'the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer,' according to the judge. 'Teenage boys, being the curious hormonally driven creatures they are, might ask: 'Mrs. Walker, I know about lying and I love my parents, but how do I do adultery?'' the judge wrote. 'Truly an awkward moment for overworked and underpaid educators, who already have to deal with sex education issues … and a classic example of the law of unintended consequences in legislative edicts.' Rabbi Mara Nathan, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that 'children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools.' Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said the ruling 'ensures that our clients' schools will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state's preferred religious beliefs.' In his conclusion, the judge offered an olive branch to his critics. 'For those who disagree with the Court's decision and who would do so with threats, vulgarities and violence, Grace and Peace unto you,' he wrote. 'May humankind of all faiths, beliefs and non-beliefs be reconciled one to another. Amen.' In a statement to The Independent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said 'the Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of our moral and legal heritage, and their presence in classrooms serves as a reminder of the values that guide responsible citizenship.' 'Texas will always defend our right to uphold the foundational principles that have built this nation, and I will absolutely be appealing this flawed decision,' he added. Lawmakers in Arkansas have advanced similar legislation, and Oklahoma's chief school officials mandated copies of the Bible and Ten Commandments in all classrooms with 'immediate and strict compliance.' Last year, District Judge John Wheadon deGravelles paused a similar Louisiana law that had swiftly drawn legal challenges from civil rights groups anticipating a Supreme Court battle. Legislation to incorporate Christian teachings in public schools joins a nationwide effort from conservative special interest groups to move public funds into religious education, dovetailing with efforts by Donald Trump's administration and across the country to let families use taxpayer funds to send their children to private schools. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reached a surprise tie in a case that could decide whether Oklahoma could open the first-ever taxpayer funded Catholic public charter school, which triggered a high-profile legal battle to decide whether public funds can be used to create religious schools — setting up a major test to the First Amendment's establishment clause. The 4-4 decision, from which Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, upheld a lower-court ruling that effectively blocked the school's opening — for now.
