{"id":590193,"date":"2026-04-22T11:57:01","date_gmt":"2026-04-22T11:57:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/?p=590193"},"modified":"2026-04-22T11:57:01","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T11:57:01","slug":"texas-court-rules-in-favor-of-ten-commandments-in-schools-law-now-libs-want-to-go-all-the-way-to-supremes-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/?p=590193","title":{"rendered":"Texas court rules in favor of Ten Commandments in schools\u2019 law, now libs want to go all the way to Supremes"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/div>\n

Leftists set their sights on the Supreme Court after a lower court ruled in favor of upholding a Texas law regarding the Ten Commandments and schools.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a great day for those who believe in the Word of God.\u201d<\/p>\n

Late last year, President Bill Clinton-appointed U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Judge Orlando L. Garcia ruled against<\/a> Texas\u2019 Senate Bill 10 in support of claims that it violated the U.S. Constitution\u2019s Establishment Clause. Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected those claims and the defunct \u201cLemon test\u201d used to support them, allowing for the mandate that the Ten Commandments be displayed in schools where provided stands.<\/p>\n

In a 9-8 decision on Nathan v. Alamo Heights ISD<\/em><\/a>, the court determined, \u201cWe conclude the Texas law does not violate either the Establishment Clause or the Free Exercise Clause,\u201d as the jurists\u00a0rejected arguments that display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms proselytizes or amounts to government-backed religious indoctrination.<\/p>\n

\u201cS.B. 10 looks nothing like a historical religious establishment,\u201d read the ruling. \u201cIt does not tell churches or synagogues or mosques what to believe or how to worship or whom to employ as priests, rabbis, or imams. It punishes no one who rejects the Ten Commandments, no matter the reason. It levies no taxes to support any clergy. It does not co-opt churches to perform civic functions. These are the kind of things \u2018establishments of religion\u2019 did at the founding. S.B. 10 does none of them.\u201d<\/p>\n

It further stated with regard to the Establishment Clause that the law \u201crequires no religious exercise or observance. Students are neither catechized on the Commandments nor taught to adopt them. Nor are teachers commanded to proselytize students who ask about the displays or contradict students who disagree with them.\u201d<\/p>\n

Given the plaintiff\u2019s reliance on the case of Stone v. Graham<\/em>, which itself was based on the Supreme Court-rejected\u00a0Lemon v. Kurtzman<\/em> and its three-prong test on purpose, effect, and entanglement, the court instead asked the question, \u201cDoes the law at issue resemble a founding-era religious establishment?\u201d<\/p>\n

Where it concerns the Free Exercise Clause, the ruling stated, \u201cNo child is made to recite the Commandments, believe them, or affirm their divine origin.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Associated Press reported that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and others challenging the law are expected to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court. In a statement, they expressed, \u201cThe First Amendment safeguards the separation of church and state, and the freedom of families to choose how, when, and if to provide their children with religious instruction. This decision tramples those rights.\u201d<\/p>\n

The law<\/a> does not mandate that school districts obtain posters to hang, but does require them to be displayed \u201cin a conspicuous place\u201d if donated, so long as they meet the requirements for size and content. The decision is expected to impact legal challenges to similar laws enacted in Arkansas and Louisiana, as the former had a similar law blocked<\/a> by an Obama-appointed judge in March.<\/p>\n

While the weeping and gnashing of teeth is expected to continue on the left up until and potentially after a Supreme Court decision, proponents of the law celebrated the latest ruling.<\/p>\n

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) reacted, \u201cThis is a great day for those who believe in the Word of God. Last session, I made Senate Bill 10, Placing the 10 Commandments in Schools, by Sen. @PhilKingTX, one of my top priorities. As chair of President Trump\u2019s Religious Liberty Commission, I will never stop fighting for Texans\u2019 and Americans\u2019 religious liberty rights.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Texas\u2019 Ten Commandments law is constitutional! This is a great day for those who believe in the Word of God.<\/p>\n

Last session, I made Senate Bill 10, Placing the 10 Commandments in Schools, by Sen. @PhilKingTX<\/a>, one of my top\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/o8A34bqYTg<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Office of the Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (@LtGovTX) April 22, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u201cThis is a major victory for Texas and our moral values,\u201d said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R). \u201cMy office was proud to defend SB 10 and successfully ensure that the Ten Commandments will be displayed in classrooms across Texas. The Ten Commandments have had a profound impact on our nation, and it\u2019s important that students learn from them every single day.\u201d<\/p>\n

Likewise, Texas Rep. Chip Roy (R), who is seeking to succeed Paxton as the Lone Star State\u2019s Top Cop, said, \u201cGreat decision in defense of Texas\u2019 right to post the Ten Commandments in schools! Proud to lead a key Amicus Brief with [Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA)]!\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Leftists set their sights on the Supreme Court after a lower court ruled in favor of upholding a Texas law regarding the Ten Commandments and schools. \u201cThis is a great day for those who believe in the Word of God.\u201d Late last year, President Bill Clinton-appointed U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas… Continue reading Texas court rules in favor of Ten Commandments in schools\u2019 law, now libs want to go all the way to Supremes<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":590179,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rop_custom_images_group":[],"rop_custom_messages_group":[],"rop_publish_now":"initial","rop_publish_now_accounts":[],"rop_publish_now_history":[],"rop_publish_now_status":"pending","footnotes":""},"categories":[18,19,10,21,12,11,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-590193","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cancel-culture","category-censorship","category-civil-liberties","category-election-integrity","category-equal-justice","category-free-speech","category-religious-freedom","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/590193","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=590193"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/590193\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/590179"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=590193"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=590193"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=590193"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}