Opinion ID: 782263
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Application of the Effect Prong

Text: 39 Appellants argue that using a symbol of the Ten Commandments on the Seal violates the effect prong because it gives the appearance of governmental endorsement of religion. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the Ten Commandments are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths.... Stone, 449 U.S. at 41, 101 S.Ct. 192. In many contexts, governmental use of the text of the Ten Commandments would convey a message of endorsement and thereby violate the Establishment Clause. See id. 40 Yet, as the Supreme Court explained in Lynch, it is improper to [f]ocus exclusively on the religious component of any activity, as doing so would inevitably lead to its invalidation under the Establishment Clause. Lynch, 465 U.S. at 680, 104 S.Ct. 1355. Indeed, the Court in Stone noted that, in the context of public education, the Ten Commandments may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like. Stone, 449 U.S. at 42, 101 S.Ct. 192. The issue under the effect prong in this case is whether, given the context in which the Seal is used and the Seal's overall appearance, the pictograph representing the Ten Commandments conveys a message of religious endorsement. 41 Although the Ten Commandments are a predominantly religious symbol, they also possess a secular dimension. As Stone pointed out, the first four Commandments concern an individual's relationship with God and the religious duties of believers: worshiping the Lord God alone, avoiding idolatry, not using the Lord's name in vain, and observing the Sabbath Day. Id. For this reason, having the text prominently displayed on schoolroom walls implies a governmental endorsement of religion. The final six commandments, however, deal with honoring one's parents, killing or murder, adultery, stealing, bearing false witness, and covetousness; 8 all of these prescribe rules of conduct for dealing with other people. Much of our private and public law derives from these final six commandments. See Stone, 449 U.S. at 45, 101 S.Ct. 192 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting) (noting the undeniable and significant impact that the Ten Commandments have had on the development of legal codes of the Western World). For this reason, although primarily having a religious connotation, the Ten Commandments can, in certain contexts, have a secular significance. See County of Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 615, 109 S.Ct. 3086 (opinion of Blackmun, J.) (noting that some holidays have both religious and secular dimensions). 42 The proper inquiry in this case is which of these two messages the Seal is most likely to communicate to a reasonable observer. In making this determination, we have considered four factors. 43
44 First, the Seal is solely limited to the very narrow context of authenticating legal documents. There is a tight nexus between a legitimate secular purpose for using the pictograph of the Ten Commandments and sword (using recognizable symbols of secular law, ones that suggest the force of law) and the context in which the Seal is used (authentication of legal documents). Even when the government's motives are permissible, if there is not a tight nexus between the secular purpose for using a symbol and the context in which the symbol appears, a reasonable observer may suspect that the true reason for adopting the symbol was to endorse religion. Cf. Edwards, 482 U.S. at 586, 107 S.Ct. 2573 (applying Lemon 's purpose prong to strike down Louisiana's creation-science and evolution-science act because, inter alia, there was not a tight fit between the act's stated purpose of promoting academic freedom and the act's effect, which limited teachers' autonomy in deciding how to teach science). In this case, a reasonable observer has no reason to harbor such suspicions, 9 as the use of this recognizable legal symbol promotes the secular purpose of enabling individuals to recognize the legal validity of documents. 45 In addition to using the Seal in a manner that promotes a secular purpose, the clerk of the superior court has not used the Seal in contexts in which a reasonable observer might not understand the relationship between the Seal's symbols and its secular purpose. Courts have held the use of religious symbols to be unconstitutional when the symbols have appeared in contexts in which the links between the symbols and their supposed secular purposes are not readily apparent. Cf. Friedman v. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Bernalillo County, 781 F.2d 777 (10th Cir. 1985) (applying Lemon 's effect test and holding that a county-wide seal with religious imagery was unconstitutional). Here, however, the Seal has not proliferated to contexts unrelated to document authentication. As stated previously, with the exception of the embossing instruments themselves, no representations of the Ten Commandments or other religious symbols appear in the office of the court clerk; the Seal is not displayed in the superior court's courtroom or anywhere else in the courthouse; and the Seal is not used on official stationery or envelopes. Rather, the seal of the state of Georgia appears on the office's official stationery. The clerk of the court has confined the use of the Seal to the very limited context of authenticating legal documents, where reasonable observers would logically perceive it as a symbol of the force of law. 46
47 Second, the outline of the Ten Commandments is not the only symbol in the Seal; the Seal also has a depiction of a sword intertwined with the tablets. The presence of this additional symbol increases the probability that observers will associate the Seal with secular law rather than with religion. 48 Appellants argue that the sword is a Christian symbol that enhances the religious effect of the Seal. We conclude, however, that the superior court's use of the sword cuts the other way when applying the effect test. Although the sword might occasionally serve as a symbol of Christianity, the sword is among the most recognizable symbols of the secular legal system. For example, numerous depictions of the female figure Justice are located on the grounds, in the courtroom, and in the frieze sculptures of the United States Supreme Court, usually holding a sword in her right hand and scales in her left. 10 The sword, in this context, symbolizes the power of law, which Justice stands ready to use in the allegorical story of the battle of Good Versus Evil.  11 In fact, another representation of Justice with a sword in her hand, a statue entitled Miss Justice, is located in the parking lot of the Augusta-Richmond County municipal building, which houses the superior court. This statue probably predates the Seal's inception, and it is likely that most members of the community who transact business with the county and the superior court have seen this statue and understand the statue's sword to be a symbol of the law. 49 Given the strong symbolic associations between the sword and the power of law, a reasonable observer is likely to understand the Seal's depiction of the Ten Commandments intertwined with the sword as a symbol of the secular legal system. Like the secular decorations surrounding the crèche in Lynch or the other lawgivers who accompany Moses and the Ten Commandments on the south wall frieze of the Supreme Court building, 12 the Seal's sword and the words SUPERIOR COURT RICHMOND COUNTY, GA contextualize the Ten Commandments pictograph. Cf. County of Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 598, 109 S.Ct. 3086 (Here, unlike in Lynch, nothing in the context of the display detracts from the crèche's religious message.). 50
51 Third, the Seal is relatively small, and because it is generally placed near the bottom or on the last page of legal documents, it is also discreet. In assessing the effect that a symbol has on a reasonable observer, courts often analyze the size and placement of the challenged practice. For example, in Allegheny County, the Supreme Court noted the crèche display's special placement in the Grand Staircase, the `main' and `most beautiful' part of the building that is the seat of county government. Allegheny County, 492 U.S. at 600, 109 S.Ct. 3086; see also id. at 626, 109 S.Ct. 3086 (O'Connor, J., concurring) (The display of religious symbols in public areas of core government buildings runs a special risk of making religion relevant, in reality or public perception, to status in the political community.) In Stone, the Court observed that the text of the Ten Commandments appeared on the wall of each public elementary and secondary school classroom in the Commonwealth, where [i]f the posted copies of the Ten Commandments [were] to have any effect at all, it [would] be to induce the school-children to read, meditate upon, and perhaps venerate and obey the Commandments. Stone, 449 U.S. at 39 n. 1, 42, 101 S.Ct. 192. 52 Two circuit courts of appeals have dealt with Ten Commandments monuments that were located or that were to be located on the grounds of state capitols. Adland v. Russ, 307 F.3d 471 (6th Cir.2002); Ind. Civil Liberties Union v. O'Bannon, 259 F.3d 766 (7th Cir.2001). In both cases, the monuments were prominently located at the heart of state government and displayed the text of the Ten Commandments in large lettering. Adland, 307 F.3d at 486; see also Ind. Civil Liberties Union, 259 F.3d at 772-73. Although the monument in Adland also contained text from other sources of secular law, the Ten Commandments occup[ied] the bulk of the surface area and accordingly plainly dominate[d] the monument. Adland, 307 F.3d at 486; see also Ind. Civil Liberties Union, 259 F.3d at 772-73 (affirming the grant of a preliminary injunction against constructing the monument because the monument was large and the lettering for the Commandments was larger than the lettering for the Bill of Rights). The Adland court found that a reasonable observer would infer religious endorsement, because the Ten Commandments monument physically dominate[d] the `historical and cultural display' in the Capitol garden area and its sheer dimensions ... dwarf[ed] all the other memorials in the area. 53 All of these cases found the use of the religious symbols to be unconstitutional, and all but the Stone opinion specifically analyzed the effect that the symbols would have on a reasonable observer. All of the cases involved displays that were large or in your face and occupied a place of prominence or special honor, often dominating the other objects surrounding them. 13 In contrast, the pictograph of the tablets and sword is at most only one inch in diameter and is not the focal point of any governmental display in an important public building. Consequently, the Seal's size and placement make it less likely that a reasonable observer would believe that the government intended to send a message of religious endorsement. 14 54 When assessing the effect that a governmental practice would have on a reasonable observer, we recognize that it would be improper to rely solely on any single factor. The fact that a symbol is small or inconspicuous, alone, is not dispositive. The caselaw shows that exclusively religious symbols, such as a cross, will almost always render a governmental seal unconstitutional, no matter how small the religious symbol is. See, e.g., Robinson v. City of Edmond, 68 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir.1995); Harris v. City of Zion, Lake County, Ill., 927 F.2d 1401 (7th Cir.1991); Friedman, 781 F.2d at 777. Size and placement are, however, factors to consider in the overall effect-prong analysis. 55
56 Finally, unlike the depiction of the Ten Commandments in the Stone case, the text of the Commandments does not appear on the Seal. This distinction is material under the effect test. Because the words Lord thy God and the purely religious mandates (commandments one through four) do not appear on the Seal, a reasonable observer is less likely to focus on the religious aspects of the Ten Commandments. Unlike the textual posting in Stone, the Seal does not induce [observers] to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments. Stone, 449 U.S. at 42, 101 S.Ct. 192. The fact that the Seal does not show the Commandments' text distinguishes this case from the monuments held to be unconstitutional in Adland v. Russ, 307 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2002), and Indiana Civil Liberties Union v. O'Bannon, 259 F.3d 766 (7th Cir.2001), where the text appeared in large lettering. Instead, the use of Roman numerals rather than text on the tablets — together with the other factors already discussed — allows a reasonable observer to infer that the government is using the Ten Commandments to symbolize the force of law. 57 Although none of the above factors, standing alone, would be sufficient to satisfy the effect test, in this case the combination of these four factors favors Appellees' position. Furthermore, we note that the Seal has been in use for at least 130 years, a fact that arguably supports Appellees under the effect test. 15 Like all holdings interpreting the Establishment Clause, our holding applies only to the particular facts of this case. See Lynch, 465 U.S. at 678-79, 104 S.Ct. 1355. Just as there is no per se rule that a crèche is constitutional when placed in a display celebrating the holiday season, compare id. at 685, 104 S.Ct. 1355, with Allegheny County, 492 U.S. at 601-02, 109 S.Ct. 3086, there is no per se rule that the use of the Ten Commandments will be constitutional when used in the context of the legal system.