Glassroth v. Moore

Decision Date18 November 2002
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 01-T-1269-N.,Civil Action No. 01-T-1268-N.
Citation229 F.Supp.2d 1290
PartiesStephen R. GLASSROTH, Plaintiff, v. Roy S. MOORE, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Defendant. Melinda Maddox and Beverly Howard, Plaintiffs, v. Roy Moore, in his official capacity, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama

Robert M. Weinberg, Montgomery, AL, William Z. Messer, Robert J. Varley, Varley & Messer, LLP, Montgomery, AL, for Beverly J. Howard.

William Z. Messer, Robert J. Varley, Varley & Messer, LLP, Montgomery, AL, Ayesha Khan, Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Washington, DC, for C. Wade Johnson, Robert A. Beckerle.

Robert M. Weinberg, Montgomery, AL, William Z. Messer, Robert J. Varley, Varley & Messer, LLP, Montgomery, AL, Ayesha Khan, Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Washington, DC, for Melinda Maddox.

Herbert W. Titus, Troy A. Titus, PC, Virginia Beach, VA, D. Stephen Melchior, Deputy AG for State of Alabama, Cheyenne, WY, Philllip L. Jauregui, LLC, Birmingham, AL, for Roy S. Moore.

John J. Park, Jr., Charles B. Campbell, Office of Atty. Gen., Montgomery, AL, for Rich Hobson.

OPINION

MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, made binding upon the States through the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The question presented to this court is whether the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court violated the Establishment Clause when he placed a slightly over two-and-a-half ton granite monument — engraved with the Ten Commandments and other references to God — in the Alabama State Judicial Building with the specific purpose and effect, as the court finds from the evidence, of acknowledging the Judeo-Christian God as the moral foundation of our laws. To answer this question, the court applies two Supreme Court precedents: Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 91 S.Ct. 2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971), and Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783, 103 S.Ct. 3330, 77 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1983).

Based on the evidence presented during a week-long trial and for the reasons that follow, this court holds that the evidence is overwhelming and the law is clear that the Chief Justice violated the Establishment Clause. But, in announcing this holding today, the court believes it is important to clarify at the outset that the court does not hold that it is improper in all instances to display the Ten Commandments in government buildings; nor does the court hold that the Ten Commandments are not important, if not one of the most important, sources of American law. Rather the court's limited holding, as will be explained below in more detail, is that the Chief Justice's actions and intentions in this case crossed the Establishment Clause line between the permissible and the impermissible.

I.

The plaintiffs in these two consolidated lawsuits are Stephen R. Glassroth, Melinda Maddox, and Beverly Howard. The defendant is Roy S. Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. The plaintiffs seek enforcement of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution through 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. The court's jurisdiction has been properly invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1331 (federal question) and 1343(a)(3) (civil rights).

The events giving rise to this litigation go back several years. As a state court judge in Gadsden, Alabama, then-Judge Moore displayed a hand-carved plaque of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom. He also invited clergy to lead prayer in his courtroom before trials. These acts led to two highly publicized lawsuits involving the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama. The first, brought in March 1995, was dismissed for lack of standing. See Alabama Freethought Ass'n v. Moore, 893 F.Supp. 1522 (N.D.Ala.1995). The second, brought in April 1995 by the State of Alabama, sought a declaratory judgment that Judge Moore's display of the Ten Commandments was constitutional; that lawsuit was dismissed by the Alabama Supreme Court as nonjusticiable. See Alabama ex rel. James v. ACLU of Alabama, 711 So.2d 952 (Ala.1998). A large part of Judge Moore's funding for these lawsuits — $170,000 — came from Coral Ridge Ministries, an evangelical Christian media outreach organization with television and radio broadcasts that cover all major Alabama cities.

On November 7, 2000, Judge Moore was elected Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. During his campaign for Chief Justice, Judge Moore capitalized on the name recognition that he had obtained during the 1995 lawsuits. Judge Moore's campaign referred to him as the "Ten Commandments Judge," and virtually everything put out by the campaign referenced the Ten Commandments. Shortly after his election, now-Chief Justice Moore began designing a monument depicting, in his words, "the moral foundation of law" and reflecting "the sovereignty of God over the affairs of men." By God, the Chief Justice specifically meant the Judeo-Christian God of the Holy Bible and not the God of any other religion.

On August 1, 2001, Chief Justice Moore unveiled a 5,280-pound granite monument in the large colonnaded rotunda of the Alabama State Judicial Building, which houses the Alabama Supreme Court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, the Court of Civil Appeals, the state law library, and the Alabama Administrative Office of Courts. Coral Ridge Ministries filmed both the monument's installation, which occurred the night before, and its unveiling; it was the only media outlet to film both occasions. The Chief Justice installed the monument with neither the approval nor the knowledge of the Alabama Supreme Court's other eight justices. He made all final decisions with regard to the specific language appearing on the monument, as well as its size, shape, color, and location within the Judicial Building. No tax dollars were used in the monument's construction or installation. Chief Justice Moore has final authority over what decorations may be placed in the Judicial Building rotunda.

The monument is located directly across from the main entrance to the Judicial Building, in front of a large plate-glass window, with a courtyard and waterfall behind it. The monument and the area surrounding it are roped off. A person entering the Judicial Building through its main entrance, and looking across the large open area of the rotunda, will see the monument immediately. The Judicial Building's public stairwell, public elevator, and law library are all accessed through the rotunda. Anyone who uses the public bathrooms in the Judicial Building rotunda must walk by the monument. The Chief Justice chose to display the monument in this location so that visitors to the Alabama Supreme Court would see the monument. While not in its center, the monument is the centerpiece of the rotunda.

The monument is in the shape of a cube, approximately three feet wide by three feet deep by four feet tall. The top of the monument is carved as two tablets with rounded tops, the common depiction of the Ten Commandments; these tablets slope toward a person viewing the monument from the front. The tablets are engraved with the Ten Commandments as excerpted from the Book of Exodus in the King James Bible. Due to the slope of the monument's top and the religious appearance of the tablets, the tablets call to mind an open Bible resting on a lectern. A picture of the front view of the monument is attached as Appendix A to this opinion.

Engraved on the left tablet is: "I am the Lord thy God"; "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me"; "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"; "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain"; and "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy." Engraved on the right tablet is: "Honour thy father and thy mother"; "Thou shalt not kill"; "Thou shalt not commit adultery"; "Thou shalt not steal"; "Thou shalt not bear false witness"; and "Thou shalt not covet." In addition, the four sides of the monument are engraved with fourteen quotations from various secular sources; these sources are identified on the monument to the extent that each quotation is accompanied by the name of a document or an individual. On each side of the monument, one of the quotations is larger than the others and is set apart in relief. The smaller quotations on each side are intended to relate to that larger quotation. The north (front) side of the monument has a large quotation from the Declaration of Independence, "Laws of nature and of nature's God," and smaller quotations from George Mason, James Madison, and William Blackstone that speak of the relationship between nature's laws and God's laws. The large quotation on the west (right) side of the monument is the National Motto, "In God We Trust"; the smaller quotations on that side were excerpted from the Preamble to the Alabama Constitution and the fourth verse of the National Anthem. The south (back) side of the monument bears a large quotation from the Judiciary Act of 1789, "So help me God," and smaller quotations from George Washington and John Jay speaking of oaths and justice. The east (left) side of the monument has a large quotation from the Pledge of Allegiance 1954, "One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," and smaller quotations from the legislative history of the Pledge, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson suggesting that both liberty and morality are based on God's authority. The full quotations from all four sides of the monument are attached as Appendix B to this opinion.

Additionally, at the request of the parties, the court visited the monument before...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Jewish War Vets. of the U.S. of America v. Gates
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • 18 Septiembre 2007
    ...on a document-by-document basis. It is nevertheless a distinction that finds support in the case law, e.g., id.; Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp.2d 1290, 1296 (M.D.Ala.2002), aff'd, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir.2003), and hence must be respected The Members' failure to appreciate this distinction......
  • Glassroth v. Moore
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • 1 Julio 2003
    ...the revealed law of God would tend in consequence to diminish the very purpose of the Ten Commandments monument." Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp.2d 1290, 1297 (M.D.Ala.2002). The monument and its placement in the rotunda create the impression of being in the presence of something holy and s......
  • Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Mack
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 20 Mayo 2021
    ...would naturally conclude that the opening ceremony "has a primary effect of endorsing religion." See, e.g. , Glassroth v. Moore , 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290, 1303 (M.D. Ala. 2002), aff'd , 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003) ("A reasonable observer would know that the Chief Justice [of the Alabama Sup......
  • Beckerle v. Moore
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • 11 Marzo 2005
    ......See Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp.2d 1290 (M.D.Ala.2002), aff'd, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir.2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1000, 124 S.Ct. 497, 157 L.Ed.2d 404 (2003). The monument was ultimately removed from the Judicial Building, and Moore was removed from office by the Court of the Judiciary after proceedings ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Seeing government purpose through the objective observer's eyes: the evolution-intelligent design debates.
    • United States
    • Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy Vol. 29 No. 2, March 2006
    • 22 Marzo 2006
    ...Dist., No. 04-4950-CV, 2005 WL 2649472, at * 14 (2d Cir. Oct. 18, 2005); Glassroth v. Moore, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003), aff'g 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002); DeStefano v. Emergency Hous. Group, Inc., 247 F.3d 397, 405-06 (2d Cir. 2001). In some cases, such as Kitzmiller v. Dover......
  • Constitutional Civil Rights - Hon. C. Ashley Royal
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 55-4, June 2004
    • Invalid date
    ...1282, 1284-85 (11th Cir. 2003). 45. Id. at 1288. 46. Id. See Judge Thompson's excellent and thorough opinion in Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002). 47. Glassroth, 335 F.3d at 1288. 48. Id. at 1291-92. 49. Id. at 1292 (quoting Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154, 162 (1997)......
  • Constitutional Civil Rights - John Sanchez
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 54-4, June 2003
    • Invalid date
    ...Cir. 2002). 8. Tyne v. Time Warner Entm't Co., 204 F. Supp. 2d 1338 (M.D. Fla. 2002). 9. U.S. Const. amend. I. 10. Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002). 11. 311 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2002). 12. Id. at 1336. 13. Id. at 1340. 14. Id. at 1338. 15. Id. at 1339. 16. Id. at 13......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT