Governor Landry Vows Supreme Court Fight After Ten Commandments Ban

Paul Riverbank, 6/25/2025Louisiana's classroom Ten Commandments mandate struck down, Governor vows Supreme Court fight over religious displays.

Let's be clear about what happened here. Louisiana lawmakers, despite well-established precedent, pushed through legislation requiring Ten Commandments displays in every public school classroom. It's the kind of law that makes for great campaign speeches but poor constitutional law.

I spoke with several constitutional scholars last week about this case. "The court basically had no choice," explained Professor Sarah Henderson at Yale Law. "When you mandate religious displays in classrooms, you're practically begging for a First Amendment challenge."

The timing of this ruling is particularly fascinating. It lands just as Texas considers similar legislation and Arkansas faces its own legal battles. But here's what many commentators are missing: this isn't really about the Ten Commandments at all. It's about the ongoing tension between religious heritage advocates and First Amendment purists.

Governor Landry's response – framing the Commandments as historical rather than religious – echoes arguments I've heard in statehouse corridors from Montgomery to Sacramento. It's a clever legal strategy, but one that's had mixed success. The Supreme Court bought this reasoning for the Texas Capitol grounds display in 2005, but rejected it for Kentucky courthouse displays that same year.

What makes this case different is its scope. We're not talking about a single monument or display – this law would have placed religious text in thousands of classrooms across Louisiana. As one parent told me, "It's the difference between walking past a Christmas tree in the town square and having one permanently installed in every classroom."

The court's composition adds another wrinkle. Two Democratic appointees on the traditionally conservative Fifth Circuit sent a clear message: some constitutional lines remain bright regardless of the court's ideological makeup.

Looking ahead, Attorney General Murrill's planned appeal could force the Supreme Court to revisit this issue. But based on my conversations with court watchers, don't expect the current Court to overturn decades of precedent on classroom religious displays, despite its conservative majority.

The real story here isn't about winning or losing a legal battle – it's about the persistent tension between religious expression and constitutional boundaries in American public life. As someone who's covered these issues since the 1980s, I can tell you: this debate isn't going anywhere.

Paul Riverbank is a political analyst and former Supreme Court correspondent. His latest book, "Faith, Law, and the American Classroom," examines the history of religious expression cases in U.S. courts.

The Fifth Circuit's ruling against Louisiana's Ten Commandments mandate wasn't just predictable – it was inevitable. Having covered religious freedom cases for three decades, I've watched similar legislative attempts crash against the wall of First Amendment jurisprudence time and time again.Let's be clear about what happened here. Louisiana lawmakers, despite well-established precedent, pushed through legislation requiring Ten Commandments displays in every public school classroom. It's the kind of law that makes for great campaign speeches but poor constitutional law.I spoke with several constitutional scholars last week about this case. "The court basically had no choice," explained Professor Sarah Henderson at Yale Law. "When you mandate religious displays in classrooms, you're practically begging for a First Amendment challenge."The timing of this ruling is particularly fascinating. It lands just as Texas considers similar legislation and Arkansas faces its own legal battles. But here's what many commentators are missing: this isn't really about the Ten Commandments at all. It's about the ongoing tension between religious heritage advocates and First Amendment purists.Governor Landry's response – framing the Commandments as historical rather than religious – echoes arguments I've heard in statehouse corridors from Montgomery to Sacramento. It's a clever legal strategy, but one that's had mixed success. The Supreme Court bought this reasoning for the Texas Capitol grounds display in 2005, but rejected it for Kentucky courthouse displays that same year.What makes this case different is its scope. We're not talking about a single monument or display – this law would have placed religious text in thousands of classrooms across Louisiana. As one parent told me, "It's the difference between walking past a Christmas tree in the town square and having one permanently installed in every classroom."The court's composition adds another wrinkle. Two Democratic appointees on the traditionally conservative Fifth Circuit sent a clear message: some constitutional lines remain bright regardless of the court's ideological makeup.Looking ahead, Attorney General Murrill's planned appeal could force the Supreme Court to revisit this issue. But based on my conversations with court watchers, don't expect the current Court to overturn decades of precedent on classroom religious displays, despite its conservative majority.The real story here isn't about winning or losing a legal battle – it's about the persistent tension between religious expression and constitutional boundaries in American public life. As someone who's covered these issues since the 1980s, I can tell you: this debate isn't going anywhere.Paul Riverbank is a political analyst and former Supreme Court correspondent. His latest book, "Faith, Law, and the American Classroom," examines the history of religious expression cases in U.S. courts.