Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 20.0

Cite as:  588 U. S. ____ (2019) 

13 

Opinion of the Court 
Opinion of ALITO, J. 

challenged  government  action,  as  well  as  any  entangle-
ment with religion that it might entail.  Lemon, 403 U. S., 
at 612–613.  The Court later elaborated that the “effect[s]” 
of  a  challenged  action  should  be  assessed  by  asking 
whether  a  “reasonable  observer”  would  conclude  that  the 
action constituted an “endorsement” of religion.  County of 
Allegheny  v.  American  Civil  Liberties  Union,  Greater 
Pittsburgh  Chapter,  492  U. S.  573,  592  (1989);  id.,  at  630 
(O’Connor,  J.,  concurring  in  part  and  concurring  in  
judgment). 
  If the Lemon Court thought that its test would provide a 
framework  for  all  future  Establishment  Clause  decisions, 
its  expectation  has  not  been  met.    In  many  cases,  this 
Court  has  either  expressly  declined  to  apply  the  test  or 
has  simply  ignored  it.    See  Zobrest  v.  Catalina  Foothills 
School  Dist.,  509  U. S.  1  (1993);  Board  of  Ed.  of  Kiryas 
Joel Village  School  Dist.  v. Grumet,  512  U. S. 687  (1994); 
Rosenberger  v.  Rector  and  Visitors  of  Univ.  of  Va.,  515 
U. S. 819 (1995); Capitol Square Review and Advisory Bd. 
v.  Pinette,  515  U. S.  753  (1995);  Good  News  Club  v.  Mil-
ford  Central  School,  533  U.  S.  98  (2001);  Zelman  v.  
Simmons-Harris, 536 U. S. 639 (2002); Cutter v. Wilkinson, 
544 U. S. 709 (2005); Van Orden, 545 U. S. 677; Hosanna-
Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, 
565  U.  S.  171  (2012);  Town  of  Greece  v.  Galloway,  572 
U. S. 565 (2014); Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U. S. ___ (2018). 
  This  pattern  is  a  testament  to  the  Lemon  test’s  short-
comings.  As Establishment Clause cases involving a great 
array  of  laws  and  practices  came  to  the  Court,  it  became 
more  and  more  apparent  that  the  Lemon  test  could  not 
resolve  them.    It  could  not  “explain  the  Establishment 
Clause’s  tolerance,  for  example,  of  the  prayers  that  open 
legislative meetings, . . . certain references to, and invoca-
tions  of,  the  Deity  in  the  public  words  of  public  officials; 
the  public  references  to  God  on  coins,  decrees,  and  build-
ings;  or  the  attention  paid  to  the  religious  objectives  of