The Eleventh Circuit rethinks an earlier ruling against a cross in a public park.
By
The Editorial Board
Feb. 26, 2020 7:37 pm ET
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals broke no new legal ground last week when it reversed its earlier decision ruling that a cross erected on a public park in Pensacola, Fla., had to go. But it carries the message that the so-called Lemon legal test that has long governed interpretations of the Constitution’s Establishment Clause may finally be dead.
The test comes from the Supreme Court’s 1971 ruling in Lemon v. Kurtzman. In that decision the Court required that government actions implicating religion have a “secular purpose”...
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals broke no new legal ground last week when it reversed its earlier decision ruling that a cross erected on a public park in Pensacola, Fla., had to go. But it carries the message that the so-called Lemon legal test that has long governed interpretations of the Constitution’s Establishment Clause may finally be dead.
The test comes from the Supreme Court’s 1971 ruling in Lemon v. Kurtzman. In that decision the Court required that government actions implicating religion have a “secular purpose”...
No comments:
Post a Comment