ACLU of Ky. v. Grayson County (Grayson I)

• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky
• Citation: 2002 WL 1558688 (W.D. Ky. 2002) & 2008 WL 859279 (W.D. Ky. 2008)
• Decided: 2008
• Church-State Issue: Government-Sponsored Religion

Description

A "Foundations of American Law and Government Display" in a county courthouse violated the Establishment Clause because its history and context reflected a religious purpose and would lead a reasonable observer to view the display as a governmental endorsement of religion.

Display: Display in courthouse of the Ten Commandments with seven other documents (the Mayflower Compact, Declaration of Independence, Magna Carta, Star Spangled Banner, National Motto, Preamble to the Kentucky Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and a picture of Lady Justice) as well as an "Explanation Document" stating that "The Ten Commandments have profoundly influenced the formation of Western legal thought and the formation of our country. . . . The Ten Commandments provide the moral background of the Declaration of Independence and the foundation of our legal tradition."

Purpose: At the preliminary injunction stage, there was no evidence, as in McCreary I, of a history that reflected a religious purpose, nor was one apparent from the display itself, so the court accepted the defendant’s proffered purpose of educating citizens about the foundations of American law and government. 

At the summary judgment stage, however, the plaintiffs did present historical and contextual evidence of a religious purpose. The court declined to consider the deposition testimony of county-fiscal-court members, but it pointed to several facts as reflecting an impermissible purpose: the display was proposed by a minister for a religious purpose, which he communicated to the fiscal court; the minister proposed that the Commandments be posted along with historical documents to ward off a lawsuit; the county executive sought legal advice on how to post the Commandments without being sued; the fiscal court repeatedly identified the Commandments as a separate and distinct element from the other documents in the display; and the fiscal court approved the display without reviewing the historical documents or verifying the display’s accuracy or content.

Effect: In issuing a preliminary injunction, the court found that — based on Books and O’Bannon, and the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in those cases, as well as the decision in McCreary I — the display of the Ten Commandments with other patriotic documents impermissibly linked religion and government. On summary judgment six years later, it disavowed this conclusion based on the Sixth Circuit’s intervening decision in Mercer County, but it nonetheless concluded the display impermissibly endorsed religion in light of its history and context.