For years, discussion over the public display of the Ten Commandments has animated Alabama’s political landscape.

The issue is so energizing, it seems, that many politicians frame their own races through the lens of this battle––that support for their candidacy is a vote for the Ten Commandments.

Even so, Alabamians have never actually gotten a chance to vote directly on the issue.

This November, however, a constitutional amendment sponsored by Senator Gerald Dial provides that opportunity.

Statewide Amendment 1, if successful, would enshrine in the state constitution language signifying two things, a) that the Ten Commandments is authorized to be displayed on public property, including public schools and b) that no person’s religion can affect his or her political or civil rights.

This amendment, as expected, has received its share of support and criticism.

Dean Young, Chairman of the Ten Commandments PAC, suggests this to be a vote where Alabama decides if we “want to acknowledge God”. He also remarks that we will be held accountable for our vote on judgment day.

Not all Christians agree with Young, however. The Baptist Joint Committee, for example, argues that “the government should represent all constituents regardless of religious belief” and not involve itself in “religious favoritism”.

The question, of course, is of the real impact of this amendment.

Essential to the discussion of impact is one provision within the amendment that will not be included on the ballot: the fact that any Ten Commandments display must comply with constitutional requirements.

This provision explicitly acknowledges that Ten Commandments displays in Alabama are subject to the U.S. Constitution, and therefore the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court, it is important to note, has largely settled on an understanding of the constitutionality of this issue through three precedent-setting court rulings.

In McCreary County v. ACLU, the Supreme Court ruled that the display of the Ten Commandments in a Kentucky courthouse was unconstitutional. In Van Orden v. Perry, however, the Court allowed the Ten Commandments to be displayed, provided it was within a larger array of historical monuments and markers.

In regard to the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools, the Court ruled in Stone v. Graham that posting the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, as required by a Kentucky law, served “no secular purpose” and was therefore unconstitutional.

As this amendment is subject to these precedents and already-existing First Amendment protections, the approval or rejection of this amendment will likely have limited immediate impact in Alabama.

What, then, is the purpose?

In a recent call with the Alabama Policy Institute, Senator Dial––the sponsor of the amendment–– answered that question.

He acknowledged that, for the amendment to have greatest impact, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to rule differently in the future.

Senator Dial also offered another reason to support the amendment. He remarked that this amendment would shift liability from the individual or government office displaying the Ten Commandments to the state. The hope of this amendment is to embolden displays of the Ten Commandments under the legal protection of the state constitution, Dial suggests, and to let the state deal with any legal ramifications.

It is important to mention, however, that the amendment specifies that no public funds can be used to defend its constitutionality. If there are legal challenges, Senator Dial suggests that a third party will fund the defense.

To be sure, this amendment brings yet again to the public eye an issue that some consider settled. The Supreme Court precedent will––new rulings notwithstanding––supersede any constitutional amendments the people of Alabama pass or fail to pass on the subject. If the U.S. Supreme Court were to, however, overturn past precedent, the success or failure of this amendment could be consequential.

This op-ed was originally published by Yellowhammer News, the Alabama Daily News, Alabama Today, the Anniston Star, The Athens News Courier, and the Brewton Standard.


MORE ON Family

1819 Podcast: Alabama abortion ban’s chief author explains what’s legal, what’s not

The chief author of Alabama’s landmark abortion ban, Birmingham attorney Eric Johnston, recently said that while the new law prohibits nearly all abortions in the state, the procedure remains legal in some narrow instances including those in which the unborn child has or would die shortly after birth, and in cases involving an emergency. Some […]

MORE ON First Amendment

Huntsville Radio: J. Pepper Bryars talks campus free speech on the Jeff Poor Show

API senior fellow J. Pepper Bryars recently discussed how Alabama could have what’s being called “one of the most … effective campus free-speech laws in the country” on the Jeff Poor Show, WVNN 92.5 FM in Huntsville. Bryars explained how House Bill 498, introduced by State Rep. Matt Fridy, R-Montevallo, would require the state’s public colleges and […]

J. Pepper Bryars: Alabama moves to protect free speech on campus

Free speech zones, meant to move certain discussions away from where they could offend listeners, or be heard at all. Speech codes, meant to limit acceptable topics to an ever-shrinking list of progressive-leaning beliefs. And heckler’s vetoes, meant to give the power of censorship to a loud minority. These tactics and others are part of […]

MORE ON The Forum

MOBILE RADIO: An update on Alabama’s pro-life bill

API Senior Fellow Rachel Blackmon Bryars provided an update on Alabama’s landmark abortion bill that is being considered in the state Senate today. Listen to the segment on 1410 AM/94.5 FM WNGL Archangel Catholic Radio:

HUNTSVILLE RADIO: Is there a groundswell of pro-life momentum in Alabama?

API Senior Fellow Rachel Blackmon Bryars and WTKI Radio host Fred Holland talked Friday about Rep. John Rogers’ recent grisly comments about the Alabama Human Life Protection Act and whether or not there is a groundswell of support for ending abortion in Alabama. Listen to the discussion here:

MORE FROM Parker Snider

What is abortion, really?

Abortion is not simply a medical procedure; it has a much larger, far less palatable, agenda. Abortion sees the life of an infant, the memories they are bound to make if privileged with birth, and tells them, “No.”

API urges “Yes” vote on Amendment Two on evening news

Parker Snider, Director of Policy Analysis for the Alabama Policy Institute, recently urged voters to vote “Yes” on Amendment Two on Alabama local news, including WBRC Birmingham, WSFA Montgomery, WAFF Huntsville, and WTVM Columbus. Watch the stories here and here or at the links below. Story by WBRC’s Alan Collins: https://www.wbrc.com/2018/10/16/amendment-rights-unborn-v-right-choose/ Story by Raycom Media’s […]