Louisiana Attorney General files petition for full Fifth Circuit to rehear Ten Commandments law
BATON ROUGE, La. (Louisiana First) — On Thursday, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed a petition for the full Fifth Circuit Court to review the state's Ten Commandment Law.
'The Fifth Circuit's panel decision in this case directly rejected the Fifth Circuit's own precedents and precedents from other circuits and the Supreme Court. This is exactly the sort of case that warrants full Court review, and we appreciate the Court's careful consideration,' Murrill said in a release.
On June 20, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the state's law to display the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms is unconstitutional. This bill passed in the 2024 Regular Legislative Session.
Murrill argues that the ruling lacks standing, meaning the plaintiff has not encountered a Ten Commandments display. According to a Fifth Circuit precedent, an encounter with a religious display is required to establish standing.
The state also believes the panel misused the 'Lemon v. Kurtzman' test. Louisiana says the panel used an outdated framework instead of using a historical analysis.
Murrill wants the full Fifth Circuit to rehear the case to allow HB 71 to be implemented.
Timeline of Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law:
June 19, 2024: A bill requiring public schools and universities to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms was passed during the 2024 Regular Legislative Session.
June 24, 2024: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit claiming the law violated students' First Amendment rights. Some religious leaders and activists also voiced opposition to the law.
Aug. 5, 2024: Murrill called for the lawsuit to be dismissed, arguing it was premature and that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate actual harm.
July 19, 2024: Louisiana agreed to pause implementation of the law until a hearing could be held, initially scheduled for Nov. 15.
Oct. 21, 2024: A hearing debated whether the law should go into effect while its constitutionality is litigated. The preliminary injunction allowed arguments on both sides regarding the posting of the Commandments.
Nov. 12, 2024: A federal judge ruled the law unconstitutional, prohibiting the display of the Ten Commandments in schools.
Dec. 11, 2024: Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed an opening brief to defend Louisiana's Ten Commandments law in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jan. 23, 2025: Oral arguments held in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to address the state's appeal of the preliminary injunction.
June 20, 2025: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the law unconstitutional.
Reproductive rights groups fear SCOTUS ruling will inspire anti-abortion politicians
Trump's attacks on CNN, Fox underscore effort to stifle questions, put media on back foot
Bill Moyers, the former White House press secretary turned acclaimed TV journalist, dead at 91
Should ICE agents wear masks?
Police seek tips after elderly woman hurt in Baton Rouge hit-and-run crash
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
7 hours ago
- CNBC
Trump loses latest bid to get Central Park Five defamation lawsuit tossed
A federal judge on Friday dealt another blow to President Donald Trump's efforts to throw out a defamation lawsuit against him filed by plaintiffs formerly known as the Central Park Five. U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone said that Pennsylvania's Anti-SLAPP law, designed to protect defendants from lawsuits targeting protected speech, does not apply in federal court, rejecting Trump's motion to dismiss the case. "The only issue before the Court is whether Plaintiffs' claims for defamation, false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress ("IIED") can survive given Pennsylvania's Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, otherwise known as its Anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation Statute," Beetlestone wrote in a 13-page filing. "Pennsylvania's Anti-SLAPP Statute (a state law) does not apply here, in federal court," she wrote in the filing, adding: "Accordingly, Defendant's Motion shall be denied." Five men who as teenagers were wrongfully convicted in the so-called Central Park Five jogger rape case sued Trump in October, accusing the then-Republican presidential nominee of defaming them. They cited a number of statements Trump made during his Sept. 10 presidential debate against former Vice President Kamala Harris, accusing him of falsely stating that the men killed somebody and pled guilty to the crime. "These statements are demonstrably false," they wrote in their filing against Trump. The five men — Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, Antron McCray and Korey Wise — spent years in prison for the rape and assault of a white female jogger, a crime they were later exonerated of and did not commit. Trump has tried to dismiss the defamation lawsuit against him, but has not been successful. Judge Beetlestone in April also threw out Trump's motion to dismiss the case against him in a different filing.
Politico
13 hours ago
- Politico
10 years of marriage equality — and what's next
Ten years ago this week, the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the Constitution guaranteed gay people in all 50 states the right to marry. The White House lit up in Pride rainbow colors that night to celebrate the victory. After years of fierce and ugly debate, it seemed as though America could finally move on. And Obergefell, whose husband had died of ALS before their case reached the court, could finally begin to move on from his grief. But that's not how the following decade played out. Anti-LGBTQ+ politics has mounted a comeback in the GOP. Republican support for marriage equality has dropped to just 41 percent. And Obergefell has struggled to process his loss — and to keep certain promises he made to his late husband on his deathbed. 'The trajectory of his life and the trajectory of American politics would twist, turn, double back on themselves, like tree branches searching for light,' writes Dylon Jones in this week's Friday Read, an intimate profile of the man who brought marriage equality to America. How can he move forward at a time when he sees American politics moving backward? Read the story. 'Justice Jackson would do well to heed her own admonition: 'Everyone, from the President on down, is bound by law.' That goes for judges too.' Can you guess who said this about Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson? Scroll to the bottom for the answer.** Yep, We Asked Bernie About It … Underdog Zohran Mamdani's stunning victory in the Democratic primary for New York mayor has kicked off a debate over what it represents about the state of the party — and where it goes from here. Holly Otterbein caught up with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a fellow democratic socialist who endorsed Mamdani in the race, to get his thoughts about what this means for the Democrats. 'I think they have a lesson to learn,' he said of the party establishment. 'Whether or not they will, I have my doubts.' Still reeling from the bucket of major decisions the Supreme Court just dumped? The lawyers at happy hour won't let you hear the end of it. Better drop these talking points into conversation so no one tries to cross-examine you. (From Associate Editor Dylon Jones) — Read Kyle Cheney so you can talk about how this shifts legal strategies like you passed the bar. 'The Court made it harder to block federal government policies, but not impossible,' you might say. 'They left open several avenues, one of which is class action lawsuits — and an organization representing immigrants has already refiled as a class action case.' — Point out the potential loss within the victory in the fight against HIV: 'The Court says it's perfectly constitutional for the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to require insurers to cover drugs that prevent HIV. But the reason they say it's constitutional is that the Health and Human Services secretary has the power to sack the task force and appoint new members. RFK Jr., who has raised questions about whether HIV is the cause of AIDS (to state the obvious, it is), ain't exactly a comfort to public health advocates.' — One for your book group: 'Everyone, there's something of such great national importance that it has been recorded in Supreme Court opinion, and I think we should take part: Let's do a line-by-line analysis of Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' How Mamdani Would Change America … Mamdani's upset win isn't just a signal that change could be coming to New York politics — it's a sign that American politics writ large could shift, especially for cities and the Democrats that govern them. We reached out to current and former mayors, as well as politicos with a deep understanding of city politics, just how a Mayor Mamdani might shift the future of urban governance and the party itself. They disagreed about whether this could represent a broader surge of democratic socialism. But one thing they all seemed to agree on? 'People across America are voting for change.' 'Ohio's Anthony Fauci' Runs for Governor … During the Covid pandemic, demonstrators — some of them armed and carrying signs with antisemitic symbols — gathered outside the home of the state's health director, a Democrat named Amy Acton who'd been appointed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. Her family was harassed, and she said she faced political pressure to sign health orders she opposed, so she resigned. But now, Liz Skalka reports, Acton is using that experience in a way no other health director who found their job politicized by the pandemic has before: to attempt a political comeback. Acton is running to succeed DeWine as governor, and her background in the health department is a major part of her pitch. 'I saw under the hood during Covid,' she tells voters. 'I saw how fragile our democracy is.' Could Iran's Exiled Prodigal Prince Take Over? … For nearly 50 years, Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran's last shah, has been criticizing the Islamist autocracy from exile, mostly in the United States. He says that if the regime falls — a possibility Trump has raised on social media — he should be the one to remake the country into 'a free and democratic Iran.' Many in the Iranian diaspora agree — but others see him, after decades away, as too distant from the on-the-ground reality. Daniel Block, a senior editor at Foreign Policy, explores what his prodigal return would mean. From the drafting table of editorial cartoonist Matt Wuerker. **Who Dissed? answer: It was Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in her majority opinion curtailing the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions against the White House. politicoweekend@ POLITICO Weekend will be off next week for July Fourth. Enjoy the holiday!
The Hill
14 hours ago
- The Hill
Judge blocks Trump order targeting law firm tied to Fox News, Dominion settlement
A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from implementing an executive order targeting Susman Godfrey, the law firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems in its lawsuit with Fox News over the network's coverage of President Trump's 2020 election fraud claims. U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan said the effort violated the Constitution and threatens the independence of the bar, which she called 'a necessity for the rule of law.' The decision marks the latest blow to Trump's effort to penalize law firms for pursuing cases he opposes or hiring lawyers he alleges are adversaries. Trump's April order sought to ban Susan Godfrey attorneys from accessing government buildings, viewing documents or representing any party that has litigation involving the federal government. The president contended that the move was necessary 'to address the significant risks, egregious conduct, and conflicts of interest.' AliKhan, a Biden appointee disagreed with the justification. 'While the Order proclaims that it has been made pursuant to the 'authority vested in [Donald Trump] as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,' Order, the court is not convinced that there is a statutory or constitutional basis for the actions taken therein,' she wrote in her ruling. 'Defendants do not point to any statutory authority that empowers the President to punish a law firm for its choice of clients, donations, or other speech, and the court is not aware of any law that would support such action,' AliKhan continued. The judge added, 'Likewise, there is no constitutional authority that supports the action taken by the Order, and it cannot be sustained based on any of 'the several constitutional provisions that grant executive power to the President.' The law firm in a statement online hailed the ruling as a 'resounding victory.' 'The Court's ruling is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation. We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional,' the company wrote. 'Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs. Susman Godfrey's lawyers and staff live these values every day.' Godfrey, which helped deliver Dominion a $787 million dollar settlement, filed a suit against the president after his order was released. Other firms, including WilmerHale, Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block, were also on the Trump administration's hit list. Several of those orders have also been temporarily locked after the companies filed similar lawsuits.
