Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 63

8 

AMERICAN LEGION v. AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSN. 

GORSUCH, J., concurring in judgment 

Lemon  against  these  criticisms—and  they  don’t  because 
they  can’t.    As  Justice  Kennedy  explained,  Lemon  is 
“flawed  in  its  fundamentals,”  has  proved  “unworkable  in 
practice,”  and  is  “inconsistent  with  our  history  and  our 
precedents.”    County  of  Allegheny,  492  U. S.,  at  655,  669 
(opinion concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in 
part). 
  In  place  of  Lemon,  Part  II–D  of  the  plurality  opinion 
relies  on  a  more  modest,  historically  sensitive  approach, 
recognizing  that  “the  Establishment  Clause  must  be  in-
terpreted  by  reference  to  historical  practices  and  under-
standings.”  Ante, at 25 (quoting Town of Greece v. Gallo-
way,  572  U. S.  565,  576  (2014)  (internal  quotation  marks 
omitted);  see  also  ante,  at  1–4  (KAVANAUGH,  J.,  concur-
ring).  So, by way of example, the plurality explains that a 
state legislature may permissibly begin each session with 
a  prayer  by  an  official  chaplain  because  “Congress  for 
more than 200 years had opened its sessions with a prayer 
and  . . .  many state  legislatures  had followed suit.”   Ante, 
at  25  (discussing  Marsh  v.  Chambers,  463  U. S.  783 
(1983), and Town of Greece, 572 U. S. 565).  The constitu-
tionality  of  a  practice  doesn’t  depend  on  some  artificial 
and  indeterminate  three-part  test;  what  matters,  the 
plurality  reminds  us,  is  whether  the  challenged  practice 
fits  “ ‘within  the  tradition’ ”  of  this  country.    Ante,  at  27 
(citing Town of Greece, 572 U. S., at 577). 
  I agree with all this and don’t doubt that the monument 
before  us  is  constitutional  in  light  of  the  nation’s  tradi-
tions.  But then the plurality continues on to suggest that 
“longstanding  monuments,  symbols,  and  practices”  are 
“presumpt[ively]”  constitutional.    Ante,  at  16.    And  about 
that, it’s hard not to wonder: How old must a monument, 
symbol, or practice be to qualify for this new presumption?  
It  seems  94  years  is  enough,  but  what  about  the  Star  of 
David  monument  erected  in  South  Carolina  in  2001  to 
commemorate  victims  of  the  Holocaust,  or  the  cross  that