Panel upholds ruling on Commandments

A federal appeals court judge in Cincinnati says a lower court’s decision to remove a small poster of the Ten Commandments from a courthouse is an “absurdity” because the judge in that case rendered the decision in the shadow of a mural containing the commandments.

Judge Alice M. Batchelder of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was in the minority, however, when both of her colleagues on the three-judge panel voted July 14 to uphold the lower court’s decision to remove the poster.

The poster belonged to Judge James DeWeese and was displayed in the Richland County Common Pleas Court in Mansfield, Ohio.

“Judge DeWeese displayed a small, unobtrusive copy of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom, as part of a series of documents and depictions that he uses for the express purpose of educating community groups in the history and philosophy of the law. It is not unconstitutional to make observations of historical fact,” Judge Batchelder wrote in her dissenting opinion.

U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen McDonald O’Malley in Cleveland made the original ruling to remove the poster, saying it violated the First Amendment’s ban on government establishment of religion.

The case was brought to Judge O’Malley’s court in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union against Judge DeWeese in March 2001.

In oral arguments before the appeals court, lawyers for the American Center for Law and Justice, which is representing Judge DeWeese, argued that the original ruling made no sense. The reason, they said, is that Judge O’Malley made the ruling in a federal courthouse adorned with a large painting titled “The Law,” which features a tablet of stone containing the Ten Commandments.

“This is a huge contradiction that courts cannot ignore if they expect people to have any respect for their opinions,” said Francis J. Manion, senior counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, which specializes in constitutional law.

Although Judge DeWeese removed the Ten Commandments poster from the wall of his courtroom immediately after the ruling two years ago, he and the center for law and justice have continued to fight for the right to restore the poster.

On Wednesday, the center filed a petition with the 6th Circuit, asking that the full court review the opinion of the three-judge panel.

In her dissent, Judge Batchelder wrote that Judge DeWeese “began his brief by pointing out the absurdity of this case,” given the contradiction involved.

“The irony lies in the fact that the ACLU does not dispute that DeWeese, in resolving the cases that come before him and whose judgments are entered… does not use and has not used these documents,” she said.

Judge Batchelder went on to criticize the 6th Circuit’s majority opinion that said “the First Amendment does not protect the posting, in a historical display used for educational purposes, of a set of rules that has played an undeniable role in the formation of this nation’s laws.”

Mr. Manion said that both Judge DeWeese’s poster and the painting are appropriate in courthouse settings.

“The Ten Commandments have been seen as a secular symbol for the rule of law, which have additional significance for those who believe,” Mr. Manion said.

Chris Link, executive director of the Ohio ACLU, said the 6th Circuit did not view Judge DeWeese’s Ten Commandments poster as “religious-based art that has historical significance.” The ACLU agrees with that thinking.

“In fact, when Judge DeWeese put it on the wall, he said people need more religion,” Ms. Link said yesterday.

“The Law” was painted by Edwin Howland Blashfield, a prominent artist in the 19th and early 20th centuries. It is located in what is known as the Cleveland Federal Building.

The building no longer is used as a federal courthouse. Since the original ruling, the building has become home to a federal bankruptcy court and the painting hangs in the main ceremonial courtroom.