Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 45.0

4 

AMERICAN LEGION v. AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSN. 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

cases  has  its  own  principles  based  on  history,  tradition, 
and  precedent.    And  the  cases  together  lead  to  an  over-
arching  set  of  principles:  If  the  challenged  government 
practice is not coercive and if it (i) is rooted in history and 
tradition;  or  (ii)  treats  religious  people,  organizations, 
speech,  or  activity  equally  to  comparable  secular  people, 
organizations,  speech,  or  activity;  or  (iii)  represents  a 
permissible  legislative  accommodation  or  exemption  from 
a  generally  applicable  law,  then  there  ordinarily  is  no 
Establishment Clause violation.* 
  The  practice  of  displaying  religious  memorials,  particu-
larly  religious  war  memorials,  on  public  land  is  not  coer-
cive  and  is  rooted  in  history  and  tradition.    The  Bladens-
burg Cross does not violate the Establishment Clause.  Cf. 
Town of Greece, 572 U. S. 565. 

II 
  The  Bladensburg  Cross  commemorates  soldiers  who 
gave their lives for America in World War I.  I agree with 
the Court that the Bladensburg Cross is constitutional.  At 
the  same  time,  I  have  deep  respect  for  the  plaintiffs’  sin-
cere  objections  to  seeing  the  cross  on  public  land.    I  have 
great respect for the Jewish war veterans who in an ami-
cus brief say that the cross on public land sends a message 
of exclusion.  I recognize their sense of distress and aliena-
tion.    Moreover,  I  fully  understand  the  deeply  religious 
nature  of  the  cross.    It  would  demean  both  believers  and 
nonbelievers  to  say  that  the  cross  is  not  religious,  or  not 
all  that  religious.    A  case  like  this  is  difficult  because  it 
represents  a  clash  of  genuine  and  important  interests.  
Applying  our  precedents,  we  uphold  the  constitutionality 
of  the  cross.    In  doing  so,  it  is  appropriate  to  also  restate 
this  bedrock  constitutional  principle:  All  citizens  are 
—————— 

*That  is  not  to say  that  challenged  government  actions outside  that 
safe  harbor  are  unconstitutional.    Any  such  cases  must  be  analyzed 
under the relevant Establishment Clause principles and precedents.