
Supreme Court May Soon Consider Overturning 45-Year Precedent
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Concerns emanating from three states' legislative decisions to display the Ten Commandments in public schools has raised questions of whether the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately weigh its hand on the issue at the national level.
Why It Matters
First Amendment rights and issues of separation of church and state have become front and center after legislatures in the states of Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas passed laws requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments.
Several plaintiffs across the trio of states have brought lawsuits forward challenging laws that passed.
In June, seven Arkansas families filed suit against state law signed by Republican Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders and intended to go into effect in public school classrooms and libraries, arguing that constitutional rights were violated.
Days later, a panel of three federal appellate judges ruled that Louisiana's similar law pertaining to the Ten Commandments was unconstitutional. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled called the law "plainly unconstitutional." Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill disagreed with the ruling, saying she would appeal the decision and possibly take it all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to the Associated Press.
And then, days after that appellate decision in Louisiana, a group of Dallas, Texas, based families and faith leaders filed federal litigation seeking to block the law in their home state—arguing in part that the public school display of the Ten Commandments "will be forcibly subjected to scriptural dictates, day in and day out," and that its enforcement violates "the fundamental religious-freedom principles that animated the Founding of our nation."
As of February 2025, Republicans in at least 15 states introduced similar legislation requiring the Ten Commandments be displayed in public schools, according to Stateline.
What To Know
Christian nationalism
Several critics of Republicans' legislative moves to bring religion into public educational spaces expressed wide-ranging concerns to Newsweek, including laws separating church and state, and efforts on behalf of conservatives to install a broader Christian nationalist framework that caused widespread concern emanating from Project 2025.
"These Ten Commandments display laws are part of a broader Christian nationalist movement to impose one narrow set of religious beliefs on our nation's public school children," Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told Newsweek. "Our country's foundational promise of church-state separation and religious freedom means that families—not politicians—get to decide how and when children engage with religion."
The U.S. Supreme Court could rule in future cases involving public schools and the Ten Commandments.
The U.S. Supreme Court could rule in future cases involving public schools and the Ten Commandments.
Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva
American United allied with other groups to sue the three aforementioned states, relying on a 1980 case ruled by the Supreme Court, Stone v. Graham, in which they ruled in an unsigned decision that a Kentucky statute requiring a copy of the Ten Commandments to be hung in every public school classroom violated the establishment clause.
"The Christian nationalists behind these laws believe they have allies among the ultra-conservative members of the Supreme Court," Laser said. "But the Supreme Court has always recognized that public school children are a captive, impressionable audience that must be protected from religious coercion.
"America's highest court would be thumbing its nose at our founders' intentional promise of religious freedom, not to mention longstanding legal precedent, if it allowed these displays to go forward."
Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), told Newsweek that his large civil rights organization "focuses on one thing and one thing only, and that is separation of church and state."
MRFF has clients across all U.S. national security agencies, with roughly 95 percent of them being Christian. They have sued different agencies, such as the Air Force Academy and the Department of Veterans Affairs, for purported civil rights violations.
He questioned which version of the Ten Commandments lawmakers and other officials in authority even want to display in public buildings.
"The point is that the 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court will decide what they want and then try to rationalize it," Weinstein said. "So, it's useless to look at any of the prior cases. I fully expect the Supreme Court will allow this in Arkansas, Louisiana, wherever the hell else it's going to be, red states.
"I'm old enough to remember—I was born and raised in Albuquerque, but I'm a military brat—being forced to be in a Christmas play as a little Jewish kid in a public school. ... Christian nationalism is this weaponized version of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that is antithetical in every way to what our Constitution is about.
"Our constitutional framers looked at Europe, where most of the bloodshed had happened, there had been when men of the cloth, men in political power—they looked at the Salem Witch Trials, they said, 'We are not going to do that here, so they carved this chasm, this canyon between spiritual and temporal in our basic foundational document.
It is "not a small thing" to put the Ten Commandments up in the classroom, he added, wondering why Christianity is paramount in these displays rather than, say, erecting the Code of Hammurabi.
Freedom 'For and From' Religion
Patrick Elliott, legal director of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, told Newsweek that he's concerned about broader laws nationally considering the number of states that have attempted, unsuccessfully thus far, to mirror laws in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas.
He also acknowledged that such a movement could occur a long time from now, as the Court currently has no such case in front of it.
"We would oppose, at the Freedom From Religion Foundation, any religion being given favoritism and being posted on the walls of public buildings," Elliott said. "I don't think it's just because it's the Ten Commandments, this biblical scripture that they want.
"But I think that it's a way for people who are of the Christian faith to, one, put their territory marking on our public institutions; and two, to coerce other people and to try to influence other people to adopt their beliefs. And that's wrong. That violates the First Amendment."
Kevin Bolling, executive director of the Secular Student Alliance, told Newsweek that the contents of Project 2025 outlined for all to see efforts to invoke Christian themes and beliefs in areas of public discourse, including public schools.
"This has been a goal of theirs for a long time," Bolling said. "The founding principles of our nation was the separation of church and state, that's a hallmark that we have cherished for a long time and there has been a coordinated effort and a long-going effort by especially conservative Christian forces and organizations to undo that."
It's not necessarily about Christianity, or any other religion for that matter, but anything being pushed on Americans that is not legally viable, he added.
"Our concern is that the government is not supposed to endorse religion nor support any particular religion, and in this case they are trying to use the government specifically to support one version of one religion over all the others. That is a violation of a basic principle of the founding of our country, and the separation of church and state.
"We support people's right to to practice their religion. We often advocate that people deserve that. But the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion are intricately linked in our society, and they depend on each other and they're important. We don't want anyone's version of a particular religion involved in the public square."
What People Are Saying
Texas Governor Greg Abbott in a new statement: "I will always defend the historical connection between the Ten Commandments and their influence on the history of Texas."
Texas Republican Representative Brent Money in May: "We should be encouraging our students to read and study their Bible every day. Our kids in our public schools need prayer, need Bible reading, more now than they ever have."
Republican Representative Candy Noble, a co-sponsor of the bill, said when the statewide bill passed the Texas House: "The focus of this bill is to look at what is historically important to our nation educationally and judicially,"
Heather L. Weaver, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, after the Louisiana law was blocked in June: "This is a resounding victory for the separation of church and state and public education. With today's ruling, the Fifth Circuit has held Louisiana accountable to a core constitutional promise: Public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith."
What Happens Next
There is no current case revolving around the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools currently on the Supreme Court docket. Challenges in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas could result in efforts to bring the issue to the nation's highest court.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
5 minutes ago
- USA Today
What did reported birthday letter to Epstein say? Why Trump threatens to sue WSJ
'A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,' the WSJ reported Trump's letter to Epstein read A Wall Street Journal report about a birthday letter from President Donald Trump to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein prompted Trump to threaten to sue the newspaper. The Journal reported on July 17 that Ghislaine Maxwell had a leather-bound album made for Epstein's 50th birthday, before he was first arrested. The book was to be filled with letters from Epstein's friends, and the Journal found that Trump was one of them. Trump said the letter was "FAKE" in a Truth Social post, and called the story "false, malicious, and defamatory," threatening to sue the Journal. The report comes as the Trump administration has faced mounting pressure from both Republicans and Democrats to release more documents regarding Epstein's criminal case. Trump previously accused the Biden administration of hiding a list of Epstein clients. The Department of Justice teased that more files would be coming out, but then on July 7, Attorney General Pam Bondi said there was no client list and no further disclosure was needed. After the Journal's story, Trump said he would direct Bondi to release more documents. See the list: Which MAGA supporters is Trump calling 'weaklings' over Epstein files? What did Trump's birthday card to Epstein say? The Wall Street Journal reported that the letter with Trump's name on it contains an outline of a hand-drawn naked woman with typewritten text, describing an apparently imaginary conversation between Trump and Epstein. According to the Journal, here is what it said: 'Voice Over: There must be more to life than having everything,' the note started. Donald: Yes, there is, but I won't tell you what it is. Jeffrey: Nor will I, since I also know what it is. Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey. Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it. Donald: Enigmas never age, have you noticed that? Jeffrey: As a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you. Donald: A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret. Trump denied the letter again in a later Truth Social post. "These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don't draw pictures," he said on Truth Social. Trump threatens legal action against WSJ The Journal also spoke with Trump for its story, and he denied writing the letter. He also told the outlet he would prepare a lawsuit if the Journal published the story. 'I'm gonna sue The Wall Street Journal just like I sued everyone else,' he said, according to the article. Trump has sued several prominent news outlets, including the USA TODAY Network's Des Moines Register, ABC News and CBS, according to Reuters. Is Donald Trump in the Epstein files? Trump has already appeared in legal documents concerning Epstein's crimes, but never in a way that implicates him. In the 1990s, Trump rode on aircraft owned by Epstein, according to flight logs released in two lawsuits. But that was 30-plus years ago. In Palm Beach County state attorney documents, an image of a message pad communication seized in a Palm Beach police search appeared, but there is nothing more than Trump's name and a phone number. When was Epstein caught and first charged? A police investigation into Epstein began in March 2005 after a woman from the Palm Beach area in Florida said her 14-year-old step-daughter had been molested by a wealthy man. In July 2006, Epstein was indicted by a grand jury on a felony charge of soliciting prostitution, which did not address the 14-year-old victim's age. He was arrested and spent one night in Palm Beach County jail, released the next day on $3,000 bond. Epstein signed a non-prosecution agreement that was called the "deal of the century." He pleaded guilty in 2008 to solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of a minor for prostitution. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, where he was allowed work leave privileges six days a week/12 hours a day over the 13 months he served. When he was released from jail, he spent a year on house arrest but was allowed to travel anywhere so long as he returned in 24 hours. What was Epstein convicted of? Epstein never sat for trial, but he pleaded guilty to solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of a minor for prostitution in 2008 in Florida. He was also a registered sex offender. He died in 2019, before he could be tried for sex trafficking charges in New York. He was found hanged in a Manhattan jail cell, and the medical examiner ruled it a suicide. Contributing: Zac Anderson, USA TODAY Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @


The Hill
5 minutes ago
- The Hill
McCarthy: Democrats ‘never' asked about Epstein files when he was House leader
Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in a recent interview claimed Democrats who are now seeking more details about the Jeffrey Epstein case 'never once' did so while he was in charge of the GOP-led House during the Biden administration. 'They never asked about it — they tried to hide from it,' McCarthy said during an appearance on Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime' on Thursday. '[Trump] didn't hide from this — he had the authorities investigate this.' 'You know what I want? President Trump focused on exactly why we elected him, and that's what he's doing,' the California Republican added, lauding Trump's economic and foreign policy since returning to the White House. McCarthy was ousted from his leadership post in 2023 and retired weeks later from the lower chamber. In his latest remarks, the former Speaker defended the Trump administration's handling of the federal probe into Epstein, the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender. The administration has faced fallout from Democrats and the president's MAGA base since the Justice Department (DOJ) and FBI issued a joint memo concluding that Epstein didn't keep a 'client list.' The finding runs counter to what Attorney General Pam Bondi said earlier this year and sparked calls for greater transparency. The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday night that Trump allegedly penned a 'bawdy' 50th birthday note to the disgraced financier in 2003 before Epstein faced sex trafficking allegations and when the two were known associates. The president denied writing the message and threatened to sue the publication. Calls for the administration to release more documents have only grown in recent days, despite Trump's efforts to move on from the topic. 'We need total disclosure of the complete file, redacting only the names and the identities of the minor victims,' Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said during an MSNBC appearance Thursday. 'There is overwhelming bipartisan, popular demand, Congressional demand, to release all of this stuff.' Trump on Friday leaned into the same argument as McCarthy, asking why Democrats did not release more files when they controlled the Senate and White House. 'If there was a 'smoking gun' on Epstein, why didn't the Dems, who controlled the 'files' for four years, and had [former Attorney General Merrick] Garland and [ex-prosecutor Maureen] Comey in charge, use it,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING!!!' His comments come a day after the president intervened, directing Bondi to release relevant grand jury testimony in the case. In response, the attorney general said she would ask a federal court to do so.


Boston Globe
5 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Congress pulls the plug on $327 million for Allston megaproject. So what's next?
This funding cut wasn't much of a surprise. The Trump administration is on the warpath to clear out any 'equity' related programs left over from President Biden. And Republicans in Congress were eager for savings to help make a bevy of tax cuts permanent in their 'Big Beautiful Bill.' So a target had been on this funding source, known as the Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant Program, for months. Advertisement It still hurt to see what's left of this infrastructure program — nearly $2.5 billion awarded but still unspent, per national nonprofit Smart Growth America's accounting — now zeroed out entirely. Advertisement The MassDOT brass already had to make do with two-thirds of the federal grant funds they had initially hoped for — a shortfall that Governor Maura Healey highlighted in January. Now, there will be more scrambling at Ten Park Plaza. So now, it's time for a backup plan. MassDOT will take two important steps to readjust. They'll embark on an in-depth cost analysis, in part to understand recent impacts from tariffs and inflation such as steel costs. That study would be paired with an independent engineering analysis about how to maximize the project's transportation benefits with the remaining available funding sources. These are logical next steps, and now they're likely necessary for the project's survival. So what kind of funding gap are we talking about? That's still not entirely clear. When asked for a breakdown of where the $2 billion would come from, state officials offered elements from the original federal grant application, including $200 million in toll revenue and $100 million from the city of Boston. Harvard University, which owns most of the old Beacon Park Yard land that would be opened up, would kick in $90 million, while Boston University, whose campus is next door, would contribute $10 million. Harvard and the city of Boston would also provide another $100 million, to be collected from future development there. In January, Healey said she would ask the Legislature for approval to use $615 million in borrowed funds, collected through bonds based on the better-than-expected money flow from the so-called millionaires tax, also known as Fair Share funds. That only gets MassDOT halfway there. In its federal grant application, the state agency signaled it would borrow another $470 million from a federal highway loan program known as TIFIA. It's unclear, though, exactly how much would be available, though US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has pledged to increase the maximum amount in financing available to many projects. Advertisement Project advocates hope the Healey administration can pick up more of the slack — maybe through a TIFIA loan, for example, or more Fair Share funds. State officials aren't entertaining this idea right now, at least not openly. Instead, the word is out that it might be time to get more frugal. Tensions have simmered in Allston for years around just how long it's taken MassDOT to get this far in the planning. It was Governor Deval Patrick, after all, who first promised this new transit hub, dubbed West Station, alongside the turnpike realignment, 11 years ago. Back then, both projects' price tags were a fraction of what they are today. Plans got waylaid during Governor Charlie Baker's administration over the so-called 'Throat' area, a narrow band of land between the train tracks and the Charles River. MassDOT finally settled on keeping all highway lanes on the ground through the area, in part to make it easier to develop on decks above them. By the time MassDOT landed the $335 million federal grant in March of last year, Healey was governor and Joe Biden was in the White House. Healey said then that she hoped for a 2027 groundbreaking; her transportation secretary Monica Tibbits-Nutt hoped environmental permitting could be done within a year. The former goal just became much tougher to achieve. The latter, now impossible. Healey hired transportation veteran Luisa Paiewonsky last year, to shepherd the Allston project (along with the hoped-for new bridges over the Cape Cod Canal). Toward that end, Paiewonsky has held monthly task force meetings to update the community and solicit feedback. Advertisement Lately, the big debate has been over layover. The plans call for four tracks to park trains at West Station, to accommodate future cross-state service, despite a promise there wouldn't be any. Allston neighbors prefer trains to be parked elsewhere, as does Mayor Michelle Wu. Harvard doesn't want layover, either, and has drawn up preliminary designs for housing to show how its land could be put to better use. All eyes are on Widett Circle, a 24-acre industrial area just south of downtown that the MBTA acquired two years ago. However, the T says it needs all the space for its own layover tracks, as soon as possible, because of an existing shortage and plans to expand the commuter rail fleet. The T plans to build the first six tracks by 2028, to support electric trains coming to the Fairmount line, and the other 20 would go in over the following seven years. MassDOT is working with the Wu administration to find a new spot that could work for layover —the public works yard next to Widett, perhaps? For now, it remains a disliked part of the state's Allston plans. Other issues remain up in the air: what to do about a temporary closing of the train bridge over the Charles, for example, and how to lessen the project's impact on the river itself. And when the task force reconvenes next week, everyone involved faces the most important of unresolved issues: how to pay for it all. Advertisement Jon Chesto can be reached at