Chief Justice Rehnquist announced the second decision on a religious display, finding no constitutional violation in the placement of a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the state capitol building in Austin, Texas. That decision was widely splintered. Announcing the votes of the various Justices, Rehnquist quipped -- to widespread laughter -- that he did not know there were so many Justices on the Court.
Bottom Line, according to the AP here:
Sending dual signals in ruling on this issue for the first time in a quarter-century, the high court said that displays of the Ten Commandments - like their own courtroom frieze - are not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to determine whether it goes too far in amounting to a governmental promotion of religion, the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a case-by-case basis.
Scalia dissented:
Justice Antonin Scalia released a stinging dissent in the courthouse case, declaring, "What distinguishes the rule of law from the dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in consistently applied principle."
You can read Scalia's dissent here.
**********
Original Post:
Readers on the East Coast will get the news of the Supreme Court decisions and any retirement announcements before we do. Here's a place to discuss them.
If you're looking for immediate news, go to:
Early analysis on possible retirement announcements: GW Law Prof Jonathan Turley in USA Today:
For Bush, there is nothing less than a legacy at stake. With two or three appointments, Bush could have the greatest effect on the Supreme Court (and the country) of any president in history.
Weep now, and weep often. If not for you, then for your children.
