In a 9-8 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled on Tuesday that a Texas law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms does not violate the Constitution.
The case, Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, challenged SB 10, a 2025 statute mandating that schools post a “durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments” in each classroom.
A lower court had blocked the law, finding it unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit reversed that decision, vacated the injunction and dismissed the claims.
Writing for the majority, Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan said the statute does not amount to a government establishment of religion. The court concluded the law “does not tell churches or synagogues or mosques what to believe or how to worship,” nor does it punish dissenters or require religious participation.
Citing comparisons to Mahmoud v. Taylor, which the Supreme Court ruled violated religious rights because it involved classroom instruction with no opt-out, the court found no substantial burden on parents’ or students’ beliefs, noting the statute “authorizes no religious instruction” and does not compel students “to believe them, or affirm their Divine origin.”
The Fifth Circuit concluded that the Texas law “bears none of the hallmarks of a founding-era establishment of religion.”
In dissent, judges said the law crosses a constitutional line by placing religious scripture before a “captive audience” of students in public school classrooms.
They argued the displays are not neutral, warning they are likely to “induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments.”
They wrote that the policy exerts “subtle coercive pressure” and risks making some students feel like outsiders.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas expressed disappointment in the court’s ruling. “The First Amendment safeguards the separation of church and state, and the freedom of families to choose how, when and if to provide their children with religious instruction,” the ACLU stated. “This decision tramples those rights. We anticipate asking the Supreme Court to reverse this decision and uphold the religious-freedom rights of children and parents.”
The American Jewish Committee had joined an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief opposing the law. “This decision sends a troubling message: that public spaces may reflect the faith of the majority, provided belief is never formally demanded,” the AJC stated. “That is not religious neutrality—it is majority rule dressed in constitutional language, and it puts minority faith communities, including Jewish Americans, at risk of becoming strangers in their own public institutions.”
