Appeals Court Upholds Ten Commandments in Case Identical to Supreme Court Case
Melanie Hunter
Deputy Managing Editor

(CNSNews.com) - A federal appeals court last week upheld the display of documents including the Ten Commandments in a government building in Elkhart, Ind.

The display inside the Elkhart County Administration Building is identical to the one pending in the U.S. Supreme Court case McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky. The documents in the Indiana case include nine historical documents and symbols, including the Ten Commandments, flanked by the U.S. flag and the Indiana flag.

"[I]t is well within the bounds of constitutional plausibility to assert, as the County does here, that the Ten Commandments have played an important role in the development of American society and civic order," the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said in its ruling.

"The Establishment Clause is not violated when government teaches about the historical role of religion," the court added. "We see no reason why the display as erected must be purged of the Ten Commandments to survive constitutional scrutiny."

The Liberty Counsel, which represented Elkhart County in the case, applauded the appeals court ruling.

"The Seventh Circuit's decision rejected the attempt to rewrite our history by removing any and all religious references. The Ten Commandments did play an important part in our history, and government may constitutionally display it for its historical value," said Erik Stanley, chief counsel for Liberty Counsel, in a statement.

"The Ten Commandments is a universally recognized symbol of law. Displaying the Ten Commandments does not establish a religion. Displaying the Ten Commandments acknowledges religion and the role of religion in America. Acknowledging religion is far different than establishing religion," said Mat Staver, president and general counsel of the Liberty Counsel.

Judge Frank Easterbrook, who dissented, said he had "serious doubts" about "the supposition that the establishment clause affects the states in the same way as the national government." The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion."

"'Endorsement' differs from 'establishment,' Easterbrook noted. "A government does not 'establish milk as the national beverage when it endorses milk as part of a sound diet.'" He wrote, "'Establishment' entails coercion: either mandatory religious observance or mandatory support (via taxes) for clergy on the public payroll."

Easterbrook also wrote that simply being offended by a religious display does mean a person has the legal standing to sue.