Cannon fodder is correct: Intent and Context are everything. This makes almost every case unique -unfortunately for the taxpayers who must ultimately pay the attorneys fees.
See the following:
Excerpts from Green v. Haskel County, No. 06-7098 (10th Cir. June 8, 2009)
The Ten Commandments have a secular significance that government may
acknowledge. See Van Orden, 545 U.S. at 688-89 (plurality opinion) (providing
examples showing that “acknowledgments of the role played by the Ten
Commandments in our Nation’s heritage are common throughout America” and
observing that the Court’s “opinions, like our building, have recognized the role
the Decalogue plays in America’s heritage”); id. at 701 (Breyer, J., concurring)
(noting that in certain contexts the Commandments can convey “a secular moral
message . . . about proper standards of social conduct” or a message “about a
historic relation between those standards and the law”). Like the McCreary
Court, we are unwilling to presume that the text of the Ten Commandments here
could not be constitutionally integrated into a governmental display that
highlights its secular significance. See McCreary, 545 U.S. at 874 (expressly
declining to hold that “a sacred text can never be integrated constitutionally into a
governmental display on the subject of law, or American history”).9
...
However, the Monument is not a part of a unified exhibit in a “typical
museum setting” like the statute found in O’Connor. See O’Connor, 416 F.3d at
1228 (noting that a brochure made clear “that the statue was part of an outdoor art
exhibit”). Nor is the courthouse lawn a setting that is typically associated with
intellectual experimentation like the university setting of O’Connor. Id. at 1229-
30 (noting that the statue at issue, Holier Than Thou, was “displayed in the
context of a university campus, a place that is peculiarly the marketplace of
ideas” and that “especially” in that context “no reasonable person would associate
the message of Holier Than Thou with the state” (internal quotation marks
omitted)). Furthermore, we do not view the Haskell County courthouse context as
bearing a close resemblance to the monument setting in Van Orden. 545 U.S. at
702 (Breyer, J., concurring) (describing the monument sitting “in a large park
containing 17 monuments and 21 historical markers, all designed to illustrate the
‘ideals’ of those who settled in Texas and of those who lived there since that
time”).15 Although ultimately finding that the Monument had a secular effect, the
district court here acknowledged that “people . . . might see the monument display
[of Van Orden] in Texas as more cohesive, more integrated, more, well, artistic
than the Stigler mélange.”16 Green, 450 F. Supp. 2d at 1288.
...
We conclude by underscoring the proposition that “[c]ontext carries much
weight in the Establishment Clause calculus.” Weinbaum, 541 F.3d at 1033. In
the context of the small community of Haskell County, we hold that the Board’s
actions in authorizing and maintaining the Monument—inscribed with the Ten
Commandments—on the courthouse lawn had the impermissible principal or
primary effect of endorsing religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.
___________
Also note what the Attorney General said yesterday:
But Edmondson said Oklahoma's monument more resembles the Haskell County monument than it does the Texas case. The Texas monument is part of an array of monuments dealing with history and the law, Edmondson said.
According to the Supreme Court's 2005 opinion in the Texas case, the 22 acres surrounding the Texas Capitol contain 17 monuments and 21 historical markers. They include war memorials, a volunteer firefighter memorial and a memorial to children. Two statues are located on the south steps of Oklahoma's Capitol.
A location for placement of the monument has not been determined.
The Texas monument was placed by a fraternal organization. That was not the case in Haskell County, Edmondson said. The Texas Ten Commandments monument
also was present for 40 years before it was challenged.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090610_11_A1_Thisfo45659
