Is it too heavy of a constitutional cross to bear? Making sense of the decision in American Legion v. American Humanist Association. Issue 1 (2nd January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hacker-Daniels, Adrienne E.
• Is Part Of: First amendment studies. Volume 54:Issue 1(2020)
• Page Start: 136
• Page End: 147
• Publication Date: 2020-01-02
• Subjects: Establishment clause -- peace cross -- free exercise clause -- first amendment -- memorials and monuments; Freedom of speech -- United States -- Periodicals; Freedom of speech -- Periodicals; 323.44
• DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2020.1742762
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2168-1430

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This essay examines the case American Legion v. American Humanist Association in which the Supreme Court decided (in a 7–2 decision) that a monument in Bladensburg, Maryland, known as the Peace Cross, does not represent governmental promotion of religion, and therefore is not in violation of the Establishment Clause. The origins of the First Amendment are discussed followed by a discussion of significant Supreme Court precedents, providing a meaningful framework for an understanding of the First Amendment issues at stake in this case. With that background, the major tenets of the Peace Cross case are examined, including majority/concurring and dissenting opinions. Finally, a perspective of this case is situated as contradistinctive to another current artifact, in which the latter engenders an untenable, harmful and violative relationship between the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.