In a Series of Well-Publicized Supreme Court Rulings in 2005

question 15

Multiple Choice

In a series of well-publicized Supreme Court rulings in 2005, Kentucky was required to remove the Ten Commandments posted in some of its county courtrooms. However, Texas was allowed to keep a monument on the state capital grounds that had the Ten Commandments listed. How did the Supreme Court rationalize the Kentucky circumstance as unconstitutional, but not the Texas case?

• A) Texas was a sovereign nation prior to becoming a state and was allowed to retain some of its religious sovereignty.
• B) Kentucky did not have the level of adequate legal representation during the proceedings as did Texas.
• C) The Texas case used a newer, more modern interpretation of the Ten Commandments that was considered less controversial by the Supreme Court.
• D) The Kentucky case involved religious displays inside of public courtrooms that are involuntarily visible to anyone, whereas the Texas case involved a monument with a historical context that is located on the grounds of the capitol building.
• E) The Supreme Court showed its bias toward western states.