PLATTSMOUTH, Neb. —A monument containing the Ten Commandments still stands in a public area in Plattsmouth, Neb., even though a U.S. district court last month ordered it removed or relocated.

“It's still there,” city administrator John Winkler said. “We're not going to remove it until it's through with the appeal.”

And Winkler said he thinks the courts might ultimately side with the city, arguing that its presence does not represent a constitutionally prohibited public establishment of a particular religion.

“The city did not place the monument and say, ‘This is the religion of the city, you have to pay homage,’” Winkler said.

The Fraternal Order of Eagles gave the monument to the city in 1965. The Eagles placed more than 4,000 such statutes across the country, including at least four others in Nebraska.

Cultural History

The Ten Commandments have become part of our American cultural history and have a right to be displayed in the town square, Winkler said.

The American Center for Law and Justice, based in Virginia Beach, Va., will help Plattsmouth make that case.

The public interest law firm asked a federal appeals court to overturn the lower court ruling that prohibited Plattsmouth from publicly displaying the Ten Commandments.

“We are appealing this important case because nothing in the Constitution prohibits government from acknowledging the important role the Ten Commandments has played in the development of our culture,” said Francis Manion, senior counsel for the Virginia-based firm.

“The people of Plattsmouth understand something the courts apparently do not —that is, the difference between an acknowledgement of religion and the establishment of religion,” Manion said.

The U.S. District Court for Nebraska ruled May 3 that the display violated the establishment clause of the Constitution and ordered Plattsmouth from “retaining the Ten Commandments display in Memorial Park as it is now situated.”

But Manion said the display is consistent with other public expressions of faith.

“Accepting a fraternal group's gift which happens to contain a text from a religious source is no more an establishment of religion than is our national motto, ‘In God We Trust’ or the phrase ‘One nation under God’ found in the Pledge of Allegiance,” he said.

But the American Civil Liberties Union disagreed with the monument's display and any public endorsement of religion.

“We see no difference between prayer in public schools and these monuments. They are government endorsements of a specific religion,” said Tim Butz, director of the Nebraska chapter of the ACLU.

“It sends a message to people in the community: either you subscribe to the beliefs or you don't belong to this town,” Butz said. “Government bureaucrats make horrible teachers of theology.”

Butz refused to predict whether the Eighth Circuit would overturn the May 3 ruling, but he said the court would likely grant a hearing to the American Center for Law and Justice. Ultimately, Butz said, he believes the Supreme Court will strike down public displays such as the one in Plattsmouth.

“The ACLJ is losing these cases,” Butz said of his rival.

Father Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things, said he thinks Butz and his cohorts represent an outdated and “overly narrow” interpretation of the establishment clause.

“It gets sillier and sillier as courts tie themselves in convoluted knots,” Father Neuhaus said. “The courts are trying to pass selective amnesia on the American public. ‘Let's pretend the Ten Commandments are not really essential to Western legal and moral history.’ It becomes ludicrous.”

He said courts have said recently that while the Ten Commandments are impermissible, moral sayings similar to them are acceptable.

“If you have 10 nice sayings, that's OK. That's analogous to saying, ‘Be nice to your parents,’ but you can't say, ‘Thou shalt honor thy father and mother.’ Or you can say, ‘Respect other people's property,’ but not ‘Thou shalt not steal.’ It's silly,” he said.

Contradictory Rulings

Although the Supreme Court has passed on taking such a case for two consecutive years, court watchers believe the justices will hear the dispute because of a discrepancy in rulings in lower courts.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that such statutes were forbidden. But both the Tenth Circuit and the Fourth Circuit have ruled that such public displays did not violate the establishment clause.

While it might take a few years, Father Neuhaus remains convinced the Supreme Court will eventually allow the Ten Commandments to be displayed in towns like Plattsmouth.

“The ACLU is not on the cutting edge. They are gnawing on an old bone,” Father Neuhaus said. “They are not nearly as strong as they were 20 years ago and certainly not as strong as they were 50 years ago.”

Joshua Mercer writes from Washington, D.C.