In Stinson v. Fayetteville School District , (WD AR, March 16, 2026), an Arkansas federal district court issued a permanent injunction barring the state from enforcing Arkansas' statute that requires the posting of a particular version of the Ten Commandments in every public-school classroom. The court, finding both Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause problems with the law, said in part:
... [T]he State makes three important factual stipulations about Act 573:
(1) “Act 573 does not direct teachers to provide instruction about the Ten Commandments or about the displays.”
(2) “Act 573 does not require classroom instruction, and it does not require that the Ten Commandments be incorporated into public school curriculum.”
(3) “There is no requirement for teachers, other school officials, or students to interact with, bring attention to, or even acknowledge the posters in any way.”
In other words, the State admits there is no educational purpose in displaying the Ten Commandments—no teaching, no learning, and no curricular integration.
The Court is “reluctan[t] to attribute unconstitutional motives to the State[ ], . . . when a plausible secular purpose . . . may be discerned from the face of the statute.”... But here, a plausible secular purpose is expressly disavowed. Act 573’s purpose is only to display a sacred, religious text in a prominent place in every public-school classroom. And the only reason to display a sacred, religious text in every classroom is to proselytize to children. The State has said the quiet part out loud....
Act 573 is subject to strict scrutiny because it is denominationally preferential and burdens parent-Plaintiffs’ right to direct their children’s religious upbringing.
Arkansas Advocate reports on the court's decision.
