Supreme Court of the United States

McCreary County, Kentucky v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky

June 27, 2005545 U.S. 844

Summary

The Supreme Court affirmed the Sixth Circuit's affirmance of a preliminary injunction requiring McCreary and Pulaski Counties to remove courthouse displays centered on the Ten Commandments, holding that the displays' predominantly religious purpose violated the Establishment Clause. The Court declined to abandon Lemon's secular-purpose inquiry, holding that official purpose is ascertainable by an objective observer who examines the text, history, and implementation of the government act, and that a stated secular purpose must be genuine rather than a sham. It further held that the purpose inquiry may consider the evolution of the displays, so the counties' earlier standalone and overtly religious presentations, together with unrepealed resolutions, tainted the later 'Foundations of American Law and Government' exhibit. Justice O'Connor concurred on endorsement grounds; Justice Scalia, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Thomas (and by Justice Kennedy as to Parts II and III), dissented, arguing that the neutrality principle is unfounded and that the displays were constitutional.

Holding

  • Whether a determination of the government's purpose is a sound basis for ruling on Establishment Clause complaints.. Yes. Official purpose remains a valid, workable element of Establishment Clause analysis; the Court declines the invitation to abandon Lemon's purpose test or to truncate the enquiry so that any trivial rationalization would suffice.
  • Whether the required secular purpose must be genuine, or whether any asserted secular rationale satisfies the test.. Although a legislature's stated reasons will generally get deference, the secular purpose required has to be genuine, not a sham, and not merely secondary to a predominantly religious objective.
  • Whether evaluation of the claimed secular purpose for the final display may take the display's evolution into account.. Yes. The objective observer is presumed familiar with the history of the government's actions; the counties' earlier standalone and expressly religious displays, their unrepealed resolutions, and the third display's amplified sectarian text showed the manifest objective remained religious, so the preliminary injunction was adequately supported.

Docket 03-1693

Cited authorities

  • CA11
  • 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  • 73 UMKC L. Rev. 1
  • 1 Stat. 50
  • 36 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 837
  • 116 Stat. 2057
  • Va. Code Ann. § 57-1
  • 116 Stat. 2058

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF