A Particularly Literate and Engaging Decision In Oklahoma 10 Commandments Case

On Friday in Green v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Haskell, (ED OK, Aug. 18, 2006), an Oklahoma federal district court ruled that a Ten Commandments monument on the Haskell County (OK) courthouse lawn may remain. The monument also contains the text of the Mayflower Compact. The conclusion of the court-- that the circumstances surrounding the approval and erection of the monument do not demonstrate that the primary purpose or effect of the monument is religious—is hardly unusual. What is unusual is the literate and amusing opinion written by federal district Judge Ronald A. White. The opinion, whose subheadings are inspired by Dante’s Inferno, accomplishes the nearly impossible task of keeping the reader enthralled for 43 pages.

While the opinion has been covered extensively—a release by Alliance Defense Fund, a story in the Tulsa World, a report from the Associated Press (including a photo of the monument), and a posting on How Appealing blog—none of these capture the truly refreshing flavor of the opinion. Here are a some excerpts:

The Findings of Fact are labeled "Cantico I". In part A. captioned "Here Is Set Forth The Story Of The Monument’s Erection And The Subsequent Although Not Necessarily Consequent Events", Judge White explains at length the setting and background of the monument. Focusing on the identity of the defendants, he writes:

The Commissioners during the relevant time period in this case were Henry Few, Kenny Short, and Sam Cole. Mr. Cole unfortunately died after this lawsuit was filed and only seventeen days after his deposition was taken. There is no known connection.

Describing the monument, he says:

This phrasing has been described by all parties to this litigation as the "King James Version" ("KJV") of the Ten Commandments. That description is not grossly inaccurate, but is something of a stretch…. The Monument’s text could best be described as a butchered paraphrase of the KJV. The only real similarities between them are the numerical order of the Commandments and the prodigious use of the idiom "shalt".

"Cantica II" of the opinion—The Conclusions of Law—contain some subheadings ("Cantos") that are direct quotes from Dante. Thus the first subpart is labeled "Justice the founder of my fabric mov’d: To rear me was the task of power divine, Supremest wisdom, and primeval love." Early on, Judge White engages in an extensive discussion of the meaning of "purgatory" in Catholic doctrine, criticizing the 6th Circuit for remarking that the Supreme Court’s two 10 Commandment decisions left them "in Establishment Clause Purgatory".

Particularly interesting is Judge White’s discussion in "Canto C" labeled "Here Is Set Forth The Catechism of McCreary and Van Orden". Focusing on whether the Haskell County monument was part of an integrated historical display, he wrote:

Suffice it to say that the Haskell County courthouse lawn is pure Americana. True, there is no grand integral design of the various monuments and displays on the lawn. They were dreamed up, developed and deposited over the years, each reflecting that generation’s view of what is appropriately historical, artistic and pretty. Perhaps the next generation will add the cannon or a nice shrubbery. In any event, this court does not fathom how artistic integration must be a bedrock constitutional requirement simply because a text of one of the displays contains religious sentiments.

Only a full reading does justice to the opinion.