SCOTUS Denies Cert on Ten Commandments in Courtroom Case

SCOTUS Denies Cert on Ten Commandments in Courtroom Case October 7, 2011

The Supreme Court has denied cert and will not hear an appeal of a case from Ohio where the ACLU challenged a judge who had the Ten Commandments hanging in his courtroom. Judge James DeWeese put up the poster, then changed it to an even worse poster comparing, as I noted here.

He put up a new poster called “Philosophies of Law in Conflict” that contained the entire Ten Commandments on one side and contrasted them with what he called the “humanist precept” of “moral relativism” on the other side…

The new display goes beyond implying what the judge said in his deposition, it outright declares that the Ten Commandments are the ultimate legal authority in his courtroom. It bluntly claims that there are “only two views: either God is the final authority, and we acknowledge His unchanging standards of behavior. Or man is the final authority, and standards of behavior change at the whim of individuals or societies.”

You can view the second poster here. The judge admitted that the first poster was there to convince people to follow God’s law:

The Judge believes that the Ten Commandments are “emblematic of moral absolutes. The Judge asserts that, “when we’re talking about moral absolutes, when we’re talking about morality, it seems to me that what they’re emblematic of is the fact that God is the ultimate authority in law as opposed to the view that man is the ultimate authority on law.” As he explains, “they are the supreme emblems or moral absolutes. In addition, moral absolutes, [he] be-lieves, come from divine law, the idea that God is the ultimate authority in law.”

Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice represented the judge. The 6th Circuit ruled against him and now the Supreme Court has let that ruling stand.


Browse Our Archives