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

Children with Gender Dysphoria need Love and Compassion, Not Gender Reassignment

A recent case in the Texas courts became a catalyst for loud debate regarding the intersection of parental rights and appropriate treatment for gender dysphoria in children. A 7-year-old child of divorced parents, born male, is believed by his mother to be transgender and that his desire to be female should be affirmed. The father […]

Alabama Follows the Law, History in Forgoing Marriage Licenses

For just over a month now, Alabama officials have not issued marriage licenses. They instead record certificates memorializing marital contracts, signed by married couples and notarized. The law authorizing this change is a sensible and principled compromise. Indeed, it might be a model for other states. It accommodates both the opinion of the U.S. Supreme […]

MOBILE RADIO: New marriage laws in Alabama

API director of policy analysis Parker Snider recently appeared on Mobile Radio to discuss the shift in Alabama’s marriage laws from marriage licenses to marriage certificates. Snider answered questions about how this change will affect new marriages in the state, whether or not other laws were changed as well, and no-fault divorce. You can listen […]

MORE ON First Amendment

If faith practices are ‘discriminatory,’ do we really still have free speech?

By Matthew Stokes, Resident Fellow Modern political candidates spend a lot of time presenting themselves as culturally acceptable to voters. That means a lot of talk about God, faith, and family, and often the winning candidate is the one who looks best driving a well-worn pickup truck. This is nothing new in American politics, but […]

Christians should protect freedom of expression for all people

It’s an idea that we Evangelicals like because we usually hear it discussed in the vein of protecting our particular right to express and live out a Christian worldview. But do we really know what our constitutional right to religious liberty is rooted in, and what protecting it for the long haul will require of […]

HUNTSVILLE RADIO: API’s Phil Williams Guest Hosts the Dale Jackson Show

Former State Senator and API director of policy strategy Phil Williams served as guest host on the Dale Jackson Show on September 6th. During the two-hour show, Williams detailed his disagreement with the decision of the Executive Committee of the ALGOP to call for Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s removal from the House of Representatives, noting that […]

MORE ON The Forum

MOBILE RADIO: How does ‘school choice’ = ‘tax choice’ in Alabama?

API Sr. Fellow Rachel Blackmon Bryars appeared on Mobile’s 1410 AM 94.5 FM LA Catholic Morning radio show to discuss how Alabamians can help low-income students who are stuck in low-performing schools by redirecting some of their income tax liability to a program that funds scholarships. It costs nothing but a few minutes and is […]

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:

MORE FROM Parker Snider

MOBILE RADIO: New marriage laws in Alabama

API director of policy analysis Parker Snider recently appeared on Mobile Radio to discuss the shift in Alabama’s marriage laws from marriage licenses to marriage certificates. Snider answered questions about how this change will affect new marriages in the state, whether or not other laws were changed as well, and no-fault divorce. You can listen […]

Mobile Radio: Parker Snider discusses the importance of census participation in Alabama

API director of policy analysis Parker Snider recently appeared on Mobile Radio to discuss the importance of the upcoming 2020 Census to Alabamians. Snider addressed misconceptions of how seats in the House of Representatives are allocated, how Census numbers influence business decisions, and why all Alabamians should ensure they are counted in the 2020 Census. […]

Why limited-government conservatives should participate in the Census

For limited-government conservatives, slamming your door on the person who says, “I’m with the federal government and I’d like to ask you a few questions” may indeed be a natural response. It is not, however, considerably helpful, especially to the conservative cause. In fact, Alabamians failing to be counted in the 2020 Census could fuel debilitating blows to the conservative movement, both in Alabama and across the nation.