ACLU Sues Over Ten Commandments in Courthouse, Saying Biblical Text Violates Religious Liberty

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Ill. — Following Jefferson County’s removal of a large Ten Commandments monument from the lawn of the county courthouse, the plaintiffs have withdrawn a lawsuit challenging the display. Represented by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the ACLU of Illinois and the American Civil Liberties Union, a group of religious and nonreligious Jefferson County, Illinois, residents filed suit last month in state court, alleging that the religious monument violated Illinois’s constitutional protections for the separation of church and state. During a meeting in late June, immediately after the lawsuit was filed, members of the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners voted to remove the Ten Commandments monument from county property. Earlier this month, the monument was relocated to a more appropriate location, the West Salem Trinity Church in Mount Vernon. In yesterday’s joint motion to dismiss, the county affirmed that “the monument will not return to county property.” Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, applauded the county’s decision: “This is a victory for religious freedom. Although county officials had no business prominently displaying biblical scripture at the seat of local government, we’re glad that they’ve now fixed their constitutional error.” Kevin Fee, legal director for the ACLU of Illinois, noted the role that local residents played in the victory: “Our clients showed great courage in coming together and challenging this illegal action by their local elected officials. It is easy to be silent and not speak up. But these brave residents stood up for constitutional values and demanded change.” “We’re happy that the county eventually complied with Illinois’ church-state guarantees,” says Hirsh M. Joshi, Patrick O’Reiley Legal Fellow at the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “It was an honor to help my fellow Illinoisans keep their local government secular.” “We’re delighted that after we sued, the county acted with alacrity to remove these biblical edicts from the seat of county government,” adds FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. “This action shows that Jefferson County understands it has no right to tell residents which gods to worship, how many gods to worship or whether to worship any gods at all.”

On March 5, 2025, the ACLU and its allies filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that the First Amendment does not prohibit states from offering limited, categorical religious exemptions or from distinguishing between religious and nonreligious entities and activities in assessing the applicability of exemptions.

SAN ANTONIO, Texas — A group of sixteen multi-faith and nonreligious Texas families filed suit in federal court today to block a new state law requiring all public elementary and secondary schools to display a Protestant version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The plaintiffs in Rabbi Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. In their complaint, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, the plaintiffs, who are Jewish, Christian, Unitarian Universalist, Hindu, or nonreligious, assert that Senate Bill 10 violates the First Amendment’s protections for the separation of church and state and the right to free religious exercise. The plaintiffs also plan to file a motion for a preliminary injunction, asking the court to prevent the defendants from implementing the law pending the resolution of the litigation. “As a rabbi and public-school parent, I am deeply concerned that S.B. 10 will impose another faith’s scripture on students for nearly every hour of the school day,” said plaintiff Rabbi Mara Nathan (she/her). “While our Jewish faith treats the Ten Commandments as sacred, the version mandated under this law does not match the text followed by our family, and the school displays will conflict with the religious beliefs and values we seek to instill in our child.” “Posting the Ten Commandments in public schools is un-American and un-Baptist,” said plaintiff Pastor Griff Martin (he/him). “S.B. 10 undermines the separation of church and state as a bedrock principle of my family’s Baptist heritage. Baptists have long held that the government has no role in religion—so that our faith may remain free and authentic. My children’s faith should be shaped by family and our religious community, not by a Christian nationalist movement that confuses God with power.” “S.B. 10 imposes a specific, rules-based set of norms that is at odds with my Hindu faith,” said plaintiff Arvind Chandrakantan (he/him). “Displaying the Ten Commandments in my children's classrooms sends the message that certain aspects of Hinduism – like believing in multiple paths to God (pluralism) or venerating murthis (statues) as the living, breathing, physical representations of God – are wrong. Public schools – and the State of Texas – have no place pushing their preferred religious beliefs on my children, let alone denigrating my faith, which is about as un-American and un-Texan as one can be." Plaintiff Allison Fitzpatrick (she/her) added: “We are nonreligious and don’t follow the explicitly religious commandments, such as ‘remember the Sabbath.’ Every day that the posters are up in classrooms will signal to my children that they are violating school rules.” Signed into law last month, S.B. 10 requires the scriptural postings to be a minimum of 16 x 20 inches in size and hung in a “conspicuous place” in each classroom. The commandments must be printed “in a size and typeface that is legible to a person with average vision from anywhere in the room.” The law also mandates that a specific version of the commandments, associated with Protestant faiths and selected by lawmakers, be used for every display. “S.B. 10 is blatantly unconstitutional,” said Heather L. Weaver (she/her), senior counsel for the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “States may not require children to attend school and then impose scripture on them everywhere they go.” “In a state as diverse as Texas, families from both religious and nonreligious backgrounds are coming together to challenge this unconstitutional law. Their message is clear: Our public schools are not Sunday schools,” said Adriana Piñon (she/her), legal director of the ACLU of Texas. “Politicians do not get to dictate how or whether students should practice religion. We’re bringing this lawsuit to ensure that all students, regardless of their faith or nonreligious beliefs, feel accepted and free to be themselves in Texas public schools.” “Our Constitution’s guarantee of church-state separation means that families – not politicians – get to decide when and how public-school children engage with religion,” said Rachel Laser (she/her), president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “This law is part of the nationwide Christian Nationalist scheme to win favor for one set of religious views over all others and over nonreligion – in a country that promises religious freedom. Not on our watch. We’re proud to defend the religious freedom of Texas schoolchildren and their families.” “One need only read the First Commandment (‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me’) to see how this state-imposed injunction is the antithesis of the First Amendment and its protections of religious liberty,” says Annie Laurie Gaylor (she/her), co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “The state of Texas has no right to dictate to children how many gods to worship, which gods to worship or whether to worship any gods at all.” “The right to be free from government establishment of religion enshrined in the First Amendment is a bedrock principle of our republic,” said Jonathan Youngwood (he/him), global co-chair of Simpson Thacher’s Litigation Department. “This law – in requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in every classroom throughout a child’s entire public school education – violates both the ban on establishment of religion as well as the protections the First Amendment gives to free exercise of religion.” The Supreme Court has long prohibited displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools. Forty-five years ago, in Stone v. Graham, the Court struck down a similar Kentucky law. More recently, in Roake v. Brumley, a federal district court reached the same conclusion regarding a similar law in Louisiana. That ruling was unanimously affirmed last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. And just last week, in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court held that a public school “burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses a very real threat of undermining the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill.” A copy of the complaint can be found here: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2025/07/Texas-Ten-Commandments-Complaint-FILED.pdf

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in Mahmoud v. Taylor that Montgomery County Public Schools must allow religious opt-outs from any lessons that parents believe will interfere with the religious development of their children, including LGBTQ-themed materials. The decision could have far-reaching consequences for public schools’ ability to create an inclusive and welcoming environment that reflects the diversity of their communities, as well schools’ ability to implement any secular lesson plan that may trigger religious objections. The case involves a district policy that prohibits all opt-outs from the district’s English Language Arts curriculum. The curriculum, which includes some LGBTQ-themed books and resources, is secular, age-appropriate, and designed to be inclusive. “While fundamentally important, religious freedom shouldn’t force public schools to exempt students from any secular lessons that don’t align with their families’ religious views,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “This decision could wreak havoc on public schools, tying their hands on basic curricular decisions and undermining their ability to prepare students to live in our pluralistic society.” “Today’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor is a drastic break from decades of precedent,” said Cecillia Wang, national legal director of the ACLU. “For the first time now, parents with religious objections are empowered to pick and choose from a secular public school curriculum, interfering with the school district’s legitimate educational purposes and its ability to operate schools without disruption – ironically, in a case where the curriculum is designed to foster civility and understanding across differences.” Deborah Jeon, legal director for the ACLU of Maryland, added: “Today’s decision is deeply disappointing. Our public-education system should be one that embraces differences as an opportunity to foster understanding and bring people together.” In April, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Maryland filed an amicus brief arguing that MCPS’s policy prohibiting opt-outs from the English Language Arts curriculum is religiously neutral and applicable across the board and should be analyzed under a lower standard of legal review, which the policy easily satisfies. This case is part of the ACLU’s Joan and Irwin Jacobs Supreme Court Docket. The ruling is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf