## Facts

- Roy S. Moore, acting as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court and administrative head of the state judicial system, arranged for installation of a large Ten Commandments monument in the central rotunda of Alabama’s Judicial Building.
- The monument was a 5,280-pound granite display featuring the Ten Commandments and additional inscriptions conveying a theistic, specifically Judeo-Christian message.
- The monument was installed in a prominent public thoroughfare used by lawyers, litigants, jurors, and visitors to access court functions.
- Moore publicly and under oath described the monument’s purpose as acknowledging God’s sovereignty and reminding judges and the public of the Alabama Constitution’s invocation of “the favor and guidance of Almighty God.”
- The plaintiffs—Alabama attorneys who regularly practiced in the building—experienced repeated, unwelcome contact with the monument and altered their professional routines to avoid encountering it.
- Plaintiffs also expressed concern that the display signaled religious favoritism inconsistent with judicial neutrality, potentially affecting perceptions of fairness for clients of differing beliefs.

## Issues

1. Whether the attorney-plaintiffs had Article III standing based on repeated, unwelcome exposure and resulting changes to their professional conduct.
2. Whether placement and maintenance of the Ten Commandments monument in the state judicial building’s rotunda violated the Establishment Clause.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment and permanent injunction requiring removal of the monument.
- The court held the plaintiffs had standing because their direct, unwelcome contact and behavior changes constituted a concrete injury.
- The court held the monument violated the Establishment Clause because it lacked a genuine secular purpose and conveyed state endorsement of religion to a reasonable observer.
- The court rejected defenses grounded in historical acknowledgments of religion and Moore’s claimed oath-based duty, holding state officials must comply with the federal Constitution.

## Legal Principles

- Article III standing may be satisfied in Establishment Clause cases by direct, unwelcome contact with a religious display coupled with concrete burdens such as altered behavior to avoid exposure.
- Under *Lemon*, governmental religious displays are unconstitutional if their actual purpose is religious rather than secular.
- Under endorsement analysis, a prominent government-sponsored religious display in a courthouse can violate the Establishment Clause if a reasonable observer would perceive it as official approval of religion.
- A state official’s religious motivations or interpretation of an oath cannot justify conduct that conflicts with the federal Constitution; the Supremacy Clause requires compliance with controlling constitutional law.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit upheld an injunction ordering removal of a Ten Commandments monument placed by Alabama’s Chief Justice in the state judicial building rotunda, concluding that the plaintiffs had standing and that the display, given its purpose, content, and context, constituted impermissible state endorsement of religion under the Establishment Clause.


Glassroth v. Moore, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003)