US court clears path for Louisiana law mandating Ten Commandments in schools

A U.S. appeals court has lifted an injunction on a Louisiana law requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments, clearing the way for the mandate to take effect.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 12-6 to reverse a 2024 lower court decision that had blocked the law. In a ruling released Friday, the court argued it is too early to determine the law’s constitutionality.

Judges stated that it remains unclear how prominently schools will display the religious text or whether teachers will reference it during instruction. The court also noted that there is no information yet on whether other historical documents, such as the Mayflower Compact or the Declaration of Independence, will be displayed alongside the commandments.

The six dissenting judges argued the law is a clear constitutional violation that forces children to be exposed to government-sponsored religion.

Republican Governor Jeff Landry welcomed the ruling, while the ACLU has vowed to continue its legal challenge. Similar legislative efforts regarding the display of the Ten Commandments are currently being contested in Arkansas and Texas.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has signaled a sophisticated new front in the nation’s ongoing culture wars, utilizing a strategy of judicial deferral that carries profound implications for constitutional law. By declining to rule immediately on the constitutionality of the mandate, the court—long regarded as the country’s most conservative appellate body—has adopted a tactical approach: it argues that there is currently insufficient evidence regarding the law’s enforcement to warrant a permanent block.

This maneuvering allows the statute to take effect while sidestepping an immediate, head-on collision with Stone v. Graham, the 1980 Supreme Court precedent that struck down a near-identical law.

In doing so, the court has effectively shifted the legal burden to the opposition. Rather than securing a broad injunction to halt the law entirely, plaintiffs may now be forced into a costly and fragmented legal battle. Advocates have termed this "constitutional whack-a-mole," where opponents must litigate against individual school districts or specific applications of the law one at a time. This represents a significant tactical victory for Republican legislators and religious conservative groups aiming to reintegrate faith-based symbols into the public square.

The decision is also a clear barometer of the shifting federal judiciary, reshaped by a steady stream of conservative appointments during the Trump administration. As the case moves toward an inevitable appeal, it is increasingly likely to reach a Supreme Court defined by a solid conservative majority. Such a confrontation could provide the ultimate vehicle for the high court to redefine the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, potentially dismantling decades of jurisprudence regarding the separation of church and state in America.

For the Vietnamese-American community, this legislation hits a sensitive nerve regarding the intersection of religion and public education. Our community is far from a monolith when it comes to faith; while many Catholic families might support the display of traditional religious values, many Buddhist and secular households are wary of state-sanctioned favoritism within the school system. From households in Little Saigon to suburbs across the country, parents are now forced to consider exactly what kind of religious messaging their children are exposed to in the classroom. Ultimately, this issue risks creating new rifts within the community, mirroring the broader cultural debates currently dividing the United States.