Federal appeals court blocks Louisiana's controversial law regarding public schools which put Christianity at the forefront
AP A copy of the Ten Commandments (AP Photo/John Bazemore, File)
A federal appeals court has unanimously blocked Louisiana's controversial law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom, marking a significant victory for civil liberties groups and families who argued the mandate violated the constitutional separation of church and state.The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a lower court's November 2024 decision that deemed the law 'facially unconstitutional' under the First Amendment. The law, enacted this year, required all public K-12 schools and state-funded colleges to prominently display a government-approved version of the Ten Commandments, regardless of classroom subject matter. State officials had provided guidelines for the posters, but implementation was suspended pending legal challenges.'Parents and students challenge a statute requiring public schools to permanently display the Ten Commandments in every classroom in Louisiana,' the court stated. 'The district court found the statute facially unconstitutional and preliminarily enjoined its enforcement. We affirm.' The ruling cited the precedent set by the 1980 Supreme Court case Stone v. Graham, which struck down a similar Kentucky law as unconstitutional.
Civil liberties groups hailed the decision as a crucial safeguard for religious freedom and diversity. 'This is a resounding victory for the separation of church and state and public education,' said Heather L. Weaver, senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. 'Public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith.' Liz Hayes, spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, added, 'All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution. Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms.'
The law had been championed by Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, as part of a broader effort to introduce religious displays in public spaces. Supporters argued the Ten Commandments are foundational to U.S. law and history. However, opponents countered that the mandate would isolate non-Christian students and violate their rights.
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill expressed strong disagreement with the ruling, stating her intent to appeal to the full Fifth Circuit and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court. The case now moves closer to possible Supreme Court review, which could set a national precedent for similar laws in other states.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Moral policing shadows couples in Chennai
Does the sight of young lovers or people of different genders hanging out together irk Chennaites? This February, advocate Thilagavati confronted a patrolman who harassed her for being with a male friend at night on Patinapakkam beach. She had recorded the encounter and uploaded it on social media. This led to much discussion on the topic of moral policing in public places in the city. Uproar over Ms. Thilagavati's experience had led to the officer being transferred. But the woman later faced cyberbullying about which she complained to the cyber police. 'More than men, women are targeted by law enforcement officers in such circumstances,' she says. Courts not supposed to do moral policing: Supreme Court sets aside HC order against Tehseen Poonawalla Many young men and women complain of similar experiences of being victims of the moral police brigade, that have left them traumatised. 'Couples, especially teenagers, are easily targetted. They are then threatened and blackmailed into bribing or assault,' says Ms. Thilagavati. Out with her boyfriend in Anna Nagar Tower Park, Thamizh, a woman in her twenties, says that they too were picked on by policemen. 'It happens all the time. Sometimes they even call up our parents,' she tells The Hindu. Even as she was speaking, a policewoman stared down at the young couple and asked them to 'move ahead.' They silently obeyed. UCC Bill 'introduces moral policing, criminalises autonomy' 'It is not good for young people if their future spouses see them being with another man/woman. Girls should carefully choose good boys that their parents approve of. They can do these intimate things after marriage also. Why now? That too in public,' reasons Meena (name changed), head constable at a police station in Anna Nagar. Meanwhile, a senior police officer of the Greater Chennai Police says, 'Policemen are not instructed to confront couples, unless a safety issue arises. They have the right to be together in public.' The 8.8 acre Thiru. Vi. Ka. Park in Shenoy Nagar has 26 security personnel and reportedly no CCTV camera inside. It is known for its watchful guards who spring into action when men and women sitting together even begin to think of holding hands. They whistle, glare down and show hand gestures before directly confronting the couples. 'We have instructions from the CMRL to interfere when couples sit too close together,' says Surya, a guard there. Sartorial preferences of women should not be subjected to moral policing: HC 'The Thiru. Vi. Ka. Park is designed in a way that there are no hideouts for couples to do inappropriate things. Every corner has high visibility and is covered by guards, who have been told to prevent intimacy between couples,' confirms a CMRL official, on the condition of anonymity. Those facing moral policing can assert their rights under Articles 19 (freedom of expression) and 21 (right to life and liberty). The Supreme Court and Madras High Court have upheld personal liberty under Article 21, affirming adults' rights to consensual relationships and privacy in public spaces. 'They can demand specific legal grounds for intervention, refuse arbitrary demands, and record interactions as evidence. Unlawful detention can be challenged with a habeas corpus and complaints can be filed with the Human Rights Commission or Women's Commission,' says Sonam Chandwani, an advocate. 'Healthy interaction between the opposite sexes should always be encouraged,' says advocate and human rights activist Sudha Ramallingam. 'In Western cultures, couples openly engage in public display of affection and this is not looked upon as vulgar. Why should it be vulgar here? I don't understand what morality or decency people are trying to uphold and impose by moral policing,' she adds.
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Calcutta HC restraints Bengal from paying monthly stipend to sacked non-teaching staff
The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed the West Bengal government to stop paying monthly stipends to a group of non-teaching staff who had been sacked after the Supreme Court in April found irregularities in the 2016 recruitment process, Live Law reported. On June 9, Justice Amrita Sinha had reserved the judgement in the matter but had stayed the state government's plan to provide monthly stipends of Rs 20,000 to Rs 25,000 to the persons. In its Friday order, the court reinforced that restriction, prohibiting such payments till at least September 26. Sinha issued the direction on a writ petition challenging the provision of the allowance to the staff whose services had been terminated. The petition was filed by a candidate on the waitlist who was not recruited despite being on the merit list, allegedly due to irregularities in the hiring process. On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's April 2024 order terminating the appointment of about 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff by West Bengal's School Service Commission. The bench passed the order after observing that the recruitment process was 'vitiated by manipulation and fraud'. The top court on April 17 permitted 'untainted' teachers to be retained until the end of the academic year or until fresh appointments are made, whichever was earlier. However, it did not grant relief to the non-teaching staff, or Group C and Group D employees, whose appointments were also cancelled. In response, the state government had announced in April that the sacked non-teaching staff would receive a monthly allowance until the Supreme Court delivered a verdict on its review petitions. On Friday, the High Court criticised the state for attempting to financially assist individuals whose employment had been declared fraudulent by the Supreme Court and directed 'tainted' candidates to 'refund any salary/payment received', Live Law reported. By introducing a stipend scheme, the state was undermining the Supreme Court's decision, the High Court observed. 'Once the highest court of the land has decided the issue of illegal appointment conclusively and opined that the appointments were result of fraud, no person who was the beneficiary of a fraudulent act of the statutory authority ought to be provided any support, that too, from the public exchequer,' the court said. The court also instructed the state government to submit its counter-affidavit addressing the petitioners' claims within four weeks, and allowed the petitioners two weeks after that to file their response, PTI reported. In April 2024, the High Court had passed its direction on the termination of the appointments based on the findings of a re-evaluation of the Optical Mark Recognition sheets from the 2016 recruitment examination in the case. The re-evaluation found that the selected teachers had been recruited against blank Optical Mark Recognition sheets.
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
As Musk's 'robotaxi' rollout approaches, Democratic lawmakers in Texas try to throw up a roadblock
A group of Democratic lawmakers in Texas is asking Elon Musk to delay the planned rollout of driverless 'robotaxis' in the state this weekend to assure that the vehicles are safe. In a letter, seven state legislators asked Tesla to wait until September when a new law takes effect that will require several checks before autonomous vehicles can be deployed without a human in the driver's seat. Tesla is slated to begin testing a dozen of what it calls robotaxis for paying customers on Sunday in a limited area of Austin, Texas. "We are formally requesting that Tesla delay autonomous robotaxi operations until the new law takes effect on September 1, 2025," the letter from Wednesday, June 18, reads. "We believe this is in the best interest of both public safety and building public trust in Tesla's operations." It's not clear if the letter will have much impact. Republicans have been a dominant majority in the Texas Legislature for more than 20 years. State lawmakers and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott have generally embraced Musk and the jobs and investment he has brought to Texas, from his SpaceX rocket program on the coast, to his Tesla factory in Austin. The company, which is headquartered in Austin, did not responded immediately to a request for comment from The Associated Press. The law will require companies to secure approval from the state motor vehicles department to operate autonomous cars with passengers. That approval, in turn, would depend on sufficient proof that the cars won't pose a high risk to others if the self-driving system breaks down, among other reassurances. Companies would also have to file detailed plans for how first responders should handle the cars if there is a problem, such as an accident. The letter asked Tesla to assure the legislators it has met all the requirements of the law even if it decides to go ahead with the test run this weekend. The letter was earlier reported by Reuters. Musk has made the robotaxi program a priority at Tesla and a failure would likely be highly damaging to the company's stock, which has already tumbled 20% this year. Musk's political views and his affiliation with the Trump administration have drastically reduced sales of Tesla, particularly in Europe, where Musk's endorsement of Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany party in February's election drew broad condemnation. Tesla shares bottomed out in March and have rebounded somewhat in recent months. Much of the rise reflects optimism that robotaxis will not only be deployed without a hitch, but that the service will quickly expand to other cities and eventually dominate the self-driving cab business. Rival Waymo is already picking up passengers in Austin and several other cities, and recently boasted of surpassing 10 million paid rides. In afternoon trading Friday, Tesla shares were largely unchanged at $320.
