Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 49

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

1 

THOMAS,  J., concurring 
THOMAS,  J., concurring  in judgment 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 17–1717 and 18–18 
_________________ 

17–1717 

THE AMERICAN LEGION, ET AL., PETITIONERS 
v. 
AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION, ET AL.; AND 

MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND 
PLANNING COMMISSION, PETITIONER 
v. 
AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION, ET AL. 

18–18 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI  TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

[June 20, 2019]

  JUSTICE THOMAS, concurring in the judgment. 
  The  Establishment Clause states that “Congress shall 
make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion.”  
U. S. Const., Amdt. 1.  The text and history of this Clause 
suggest  that  it  should  not  be  incorporated  against  the 
States.  Even if the Clause expresses an individual right 
enforceable against the States, it is limited by its text to 
“law[s]” enacted by a legislature, so it is unclear whether 
the Bladensburg Cross would implicate any incorporated 
right.  And even if it did, this religious display does not 
involve the type of actual legal coercion that was a hall-
mark of historical establishments of religion.  Therefore, 
the Cross is clearly constitutional. 

I 
  As  I  have  explained  elsewhere,  the  Establishment 
Clause resists incorporation against the States.  Town of 
Greece v. Galloway, 572 U. S. 565, 604–607 (2014) (opinion 
concurring in part and concurring in judgment); Elk Grove