the Amendments are constitutional and satisfy all three prongs of the Lemon analysis. There is no excessive entanglement, and the primary effect of the Amendments is not to advance religion. The most difficult prong—for this and for moment of silence statutes generally—is legislative purpose. But our review of legislative history is deferential, and such deference leads to an adequate secular purpose in this case.... Here, that intent was to promote patriotism and allow for a moment of quiet contemplation.The San Angelo Standard Times reported on the decision yesterday. (See prior related posting.)
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
5th Circuit Upholds Texas Moment of Silence Law
In Croft v. Governor of the State of Texas, (5th Cir., March 16, 2009), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Texas moment of silence statute against an Establishment Clause challenge. The statute, as amended in 2003, requires "the observance of one minute of silence" at every Texas school, during which "each student may, as the student chooses, reflect, pray, meditate, or engage in any other silent activity that is not likely to interfere with or distract another student." The Court concluded: