|
June 27, 2005
Union
of Orthodox Jewish Congregations
Welcomes Supreme Court
Rulings on Public Displays
of The Ten Commandments; Extreme
Positions Rejected in Favor
of Sensible Approach
of Neutrality
Today, the
Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America – the nation’s
largest Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization – through its
Institute for Public Affairs, welcomed this morning’s pair of
rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court finding public displays of the
Ten Commandments to be constitutional when displayed in an
appropriate context.
The UOJCA had joined with other national Orthodox Jewish
organizations in filing a “friend of the court” brief with the
Court in this case urging the court to uphold the public display
of the text of what is popularly known as “the Ten Commandments.”
The brief, filed in the case from Texas of Van Orden v. Perry
under the aegis of the National Jewish Coalition on Law & Public
Affairs, was principally authored by Washington attorney and
Institute board member Nathan Lewin and can be viewed at
http://www.ou.org/public/Publib/briefs.htm
The amicus brief recognized that critical element which determines
the constitutionality of public displays of the Ten Commandments,
and similar religiously rooted symbols, is the context in which
they are displayed. The brief opposed the actions of the Sixth
Circuit Court of Appeals in the Kentucky case which, in the words
of the brief “would require public officials to actively undertake
special steps to secularize an otherwise non-denominational public
display of the Ten Commandments.” But, the amicus brief did
acknowledge that “evidence of religious favoritism” by the public
officials mounting the display “might, in our view, constitute
impermissible endorsement [of religion].” The high court’s
majority did find such evidence in the background to the Kentucky
courthouse display.
In connection with the high court’s ruling, Nathan Diament, the
Union’s director of public policy, stated: “As representatives of
the faith to whom the Ten Commandments were initially given on
Sinai, we have a deep appreciation for the role these principles
have played in the development of a just and moral society. To
entirely eliminate their display from the public square on the
basis of their religious source would be a misguided attempt to
oust religion from its critical role in American life. Taken
together, the Court’s rulings in the Kentucky and Texas cases
indicate that the Court remains committed to the principle that
the Constitution demands government neutrality – not
discrimination – toward religion. Those who would remove from the
public square any symbol with a religious pedigree have been
rebuffed; as have those who would deliberately use public
resources to promote a particular religious message. These rulings
are a victory for a sensible and moderate approach to the
Constitution’s protection of religious liberty and defeat for the
extremists of both political poles. It is a very good day for the
Constitution in general and for religious liberty in the United
States in particular.”
###
|
