That is the ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court in regards to the Bladensburg WWI Memorial in Prince George’s County, Maryland.
The American Humanist Association claimed the cross-shaped memorial in Prince George’s County Maryland is a violation of the Establishment Clause, as the memorial is on public property.
But a majority of the Supreme Court disagreed — including Trump nominees Neil Gorsuch and Bret Kavanaugh.
Attorneys with First Liberty Institute argued the case on behalf of The American Legion.
“It’s big for the Bladensburg cross, and for veterans memorials all across the country who’ve been attacked left and right because they have you know a religious symbol attached to them,” said First Liberty Institute president Kelly Shackelford.
Shackelford went on to say that the Bladensburg case is a landmark decision for religious freedom in America.
“Justices said there have been years of attacks on religious symbols and memorials and monuments, you name it, we’ve seen it, all based on this case called Lemon, which is a really a bad case that misinterpreted the Constitution back in the 1970’s,” Shackelford explained.
“Today, the Court said, ‘We’re no longer applying Lemon in this context at all, and in fact, we consider our longstanding historical monuments, memorials, (and) practices, whether they’re religious or not, they’re presumptively constitutional, and we’re not going to look to tear down all the religious symbols or memorials across our country.’”
Shackelford called that a significant sea change in terms of the hostility to religion by government.
“And I think we’re going to start to see a really significant turn from this case on.”
However, some pro-religious liberty organizations were not immediately ready to call this a complete victory.
Family Research Council, which filed a brief in support of the cross-shaped memorial, said “this decision leaves in place the tangled confusion of past Establishment Clause opinions, which are currently being used to remove religious messages, signs, and symbols from public squares around our country.”
“Kelly, I want to clarify one thing,” chimed Todd Starnes. “Is it safe to call this a landmark decision?”
“I think it is a landmark decision because this Lemon case, which has been there for 50 years, has been used to sort of create a hostility to religion by the government,” answered the attorney. “The Court said for the first time in this decision that ‘we’re not applying that anymore in this context’ and ‘Instead, we’re going to consider these religious monuments, memorials, history, etc., to be preemptively constitutional, not unconstitutional.’”
Read the rest at: SCOTUS