The Satanic Temple Files as Intervenor in Arkansas 10 Commandments Lawsuits

The Satanic Temple Files as Intervenor in Arkansas 10 Commandments Lawsuits July 13, 2018

In May the ACLU and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) filed lawsuits against the State of Arkansas regarding the unconstitutionality of the State’s 10 Commandments monument on the grounds of the Arkansas State Capital. Today, The Satanic Temple (TST) has joined these suits, filing as an intervenor and arguing that they also have standing in the case.

The Lawsuits have been Consolidated

The ACLU and FFRF lawsuits were consolidated into one action last week. This triggered TST’s filing because while they agree with the unconstitutionality of a solitary religious monument on public grounds, TST asserts that they offer a competing remedy: the court ordered erection of TST’s Baphomet Monument.

“We moved to intervene due to our remedy not being addressed by the current lawsuit. Where other organizations have demanded the removal of the Ten Commandments Monument, The Satanic Temple petitioned for the placement of its own monument of Baphomet. It is a fundamental principle in the United States that when one religion is represented in a public forum the government may not then endorse that religion or disparage others. In this case, the State of Arkansas has done both.”-TST legal counsel Stu De Haan

Image Credit: The Satanic Temple

From the filing:

“Movants are well acquainted with the litigation but have an independent theory of relief and an alternative prayer for relief from the Plaintiffs. More particularly, Movants are principally seeking a court order to require Defendants install Movant’s religious monument. Contrast Plaintiffs’ complaint at p. 31 (praying for an order to remove the Ten Commandments Monument) with Proposed Intervenor’s complaint in intervention at p. 9 (praying for an order to immediately place the Baphomet Monument or, alternatively, to remove the Ten Commandments Monument.)”

A Strategy of Inclusion

The reason TST is filing to intervene instead of simply join or support the existing lawsuit is a nontrivial point. While the ACLU and FFRF are arguing that the existence of any religious monument on government property is an endorsement and the monument should come down, TST is arguing instead that the monument could remain and still be constitutional if other monuments of different religions are established to demonstrate religious plurality. Basically, arguing for the removal of the religious monument (an argument that has been a perpetual thorn in the side of theocrats who see it as an attempt to remove religion from the public square) isn’t the only argument there is to make. In plaintiff Erika Robbins’ affidavit filed with the motion she stated:

If my religious beliefs were accommodated, specifically by a court order to either erect the Baphomet monument or remove the Ten Commandments monument, my issue would be resolved. The placement of the Baphomet monument on public grounds would encourage me to visit these public grounds by symbolically acknowledging me and my faith and accepting me as a full citizen of the State.”

Put simply TST’s argument is that the solution can be more religion, not less, which is tantamount to a big ‘be careful what you wish for’ to theocrats who seek to impose only their own religious beliefs on the citizenry while excluding competing beliefs.

What Jason Rapert is Going to Complain About

Arkansas Senator Jason Rapert is going to complain that Lucien Greaves filed under the name Lucien Greaves because that name is known to be a pseudonym. That’s a legally pointless argument and by the way Jason’s real name is Stanley so I’ve never been sure why he thinks he can do it but Lucien can’t. The irony of it has always made me wonder if deep down he suspects that his case might not be very strong. If the best argument he’s got is Greaves uses a nom de plume then he’s in a lot of trouble.

The other argument Stanley likes to make is that the monument isn’t religious. We’ve covered the absurdity of that argument before here when covering the Arkansas monument’s re-installation.

About Jack Matirko
Jack Matirko is an activist, blogger, and podcaster focussing on issues of church and state separation. He runs Patheos' Satanic Blog For Infernal Use Only (patheos.com/blogs/infernal), co-hosts the Naked Diner Podcast (patreon.com/nakeddiner), and is a member of The Satanic Temple-Arizona Chapter. His opinions are his own. To contribute to his work please consider becoming a patron of his podcast. You can read more about the author here.
"Not a problem in my country. What are you doing about it?"

Satanic Self-Care in the Age of ..."
"What are you yourself doing to ensure women run and get to vote? More to ..."

Satanic Self-Care in the Age of ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • WallofSleep

    The Satanic Temple; doing the lord’s work.

    Wait, I’ll come in again…

  • (eating popcorn intensifies)

  • A Satanist walks into a bar … it was Stu, pro hac vice in Arkansas

  • Brian Westley

    I want to see headlines about “court ordered erections”. Where is Emily Litella when we need her?

  • Guzzman

    Senator Rapert is just another Liar for Jesus when he claims “the Supreme Court ruled in Van Orden v. Perry in 2005 that such monuments are constitutional.” He failed to mention WHY the Supreme Court upheld the display of the Ten Commandments in that one case.

    In Van Orden v. Perry, the Ten Commandments monument was on a 22-acre museum-like plaza and was one of 17 monuments and 21 historical markers decorating the capitol grounds. As Justice Souter remarked, “context matters.” In all other cases, such monuments have been ruled unconstitutional because they were stand-alone religious displays that gave the appearance of government endorsement of religion. The display in Van Orden was more akin to a museum piece on display with dozens of other items.

  • You’ve got to admit that having the Baphomet right next to the 10 C would definitely change the context

  • Leisuresuitbruce

    Senator Rapert has proven himself worthy of a Trump cabinet appointment. What should he be put in charge of?

  • He’d probably put him in charge of Interior so they could put a monument in the Grand Canyon ‘commemorating the historicity of Noah’s flood’ or something insane like that