Indiana Nativity Scene case

(Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana)

No credit identified for photo, Majority opinion, pg 4 (2019 holiday display, pg 5)

Case Significance

 

In Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a nativity scene on government property did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The court departed from longstanding doctrine that evaluated holiday display cases using the Lemon test.

 

In a 2 - 1 decision, Seventh Circuit declined to apply the Supreme Court’s three-part test set out in Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Lemon test, which is typically used to evaluate the constitutionality of newly-erected holiday displays. Instead, it relied on the Supreme Court's “historical practices” rule in American Legion v. American Humanist Association, which held that religious displays on government property do not violate the Establishment Clause if they are part of a longstanding and historical tradition.

 

Sources:

The Seventh Circuit Holds That Nativity Scenes on Government Property Are Constitutional Under the First Amendment

Westlaw Today (Thomson Reuters); Law stated as of 22 Feb 2021; USA (National/Federal); by Practical Law Government Practice

https://today.westlaw.com/Document/Ide0013d8713e11ebbea4f0dc9fb69570/View/FullText.html?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true

 

Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana: Seventh Circuit Permits Nativity Scene on Government Property

Jolt Digest; By Mariah Bellamoroso – Edited by Caleb Kim; February 21, 2021

https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/woodring-v-jackson-county-indiana-seventh-circuit-permits-nativity-scene-on-government-property

 

Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021) 

Justia.com; https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/20-1881/20-1881-2021-02-02.html

Case Overview

 

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021)  Majority Opinion Background I. A. The Nativity Scene, pp 2 - 4

 

A historic courthouse sits on Main Street in Brownstown, Indiana, the county seat of Jackson County. The courthouse sits in the middle of a park-like square, bordered on all sides by intersecting streets. It has a large front lawn that faces Main Street. Permanent fixtures on the front lawn include a bell, a flagpole, a tank, and a granite monument that serves as a memorial to veterans. The front lawn is on the west side of the courthouse. The Judicial Center is on its east side. The east and west sides of the courthouse have main entrances. 

 

[The location] has hosted an annual nativity holiday display on its lawn from around Thanksgiving to New Year’s Day since 2003. A Ministerial Association owns the display, the local Lion’s Club (a secular group) takes care of it and sets it up each year. The County supplies electricity for the display. There is evidence that the courthouse had similar displays before 2003.,

 

The display—a collection of wire-framed shapes that light up from dusk to dawn—straddles a sidewalk leading from the front courthouse doors to Main Street. The display consists of a waving Santa Claus with his sleigh, a reindeer, seven large candy-striped poles, the nativity scene (also known as a crèche), and four carolers standing in front of a lamp post. Santa Claus and the reindeer are on the left edge of the display. To their right are three gift-bearing kings (Magi) and a camel, who look upon the nativity. On the right side of the sidewalk, Mary, Joseph, and infant Jesus in the stable are flanked on each side by trumpet-playing angels. To their right are several animals facing the nativity. The carolers stand in front of the animals, closer to Main Street. The tall candy-striped poles are interspersed along the back edge of the display.

 

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021)  Dissenting Opinion Section II. A. pp 37, 38

 

The Nativity scene actually straddles the main walkway from the street to the courthouse entrance. A person visiting county offices must walk right between the wise men and the holy manger. This takes on extra significance at the county’s annual holiday celebration when the community processes in single file along the walkway into the courthouse. Moreover, religious figures and symbols outnumber the secular symbols, which are relegated to the edges of the display. The Nativity scene remains the central, dominant display. (From Note 1 p38.:  American courts deem Santa Claus and Christmas trees to be secular symbols, regardless of their origins.)

Case Chronology

 

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021)   I. A. The Nativity Scene p5

In December 2018, the Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to the County demanding removal of the nativity scene on the ground that it violated the Establishment Clause.  In response to the letter, the County re-arranged the display into its current format so that all items, secular and non-secular, appeared in one field of view. The County intended this change to be permanent and instructed the Lions Club to preserve the same arrangement in future years, with “at least as many and as large non-religious items … placed at least as close to each other.”

 

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021) I. C. This Lawsuit p 7

In late December 2018, Woodring filed this lawsuit ... against the County, alleging that the nativity scene at the historic courthouse violates the Establishment Clause. Woodring sought a declaration and permanent in-junction prohibiting the County from displaying the nativity scene on the front lawn of the courthouse.

 

The parties cross-moved for summary judgment. Woodring moved for summary judgment on the merits. The County moved for summary judgment on standing and on the merits.

 

The district court granted Woodring’s motion for summary judgment and denied the County’s motion. The court found that Woodring had standing to challenge the dis-play because she had to come into “direct and unwelcome contact” with it while exercising her rights as a citizen of Jack-son County. On the merits, the court found that the nativity scene ran afoul of the Establishment Clause

 

The County [appealed] the district court’s summary judgment rulings to the 7th Circuit.  The First Liberty Institute and the Brownstown Area Ministerial Association submitted amicus briefs in support of the County. The Freedom From Religion Foundation submitted an amicus brief in support of Woodring.

 

On 12 November 2020, the case was argued before a 3-judge panel of the 7th Circuit.

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021) pg. 1

 

On 02 February 2021, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a nativity scene on government property did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

The Seventh Circuit Holds That Nativity Scenes on Government Property Are Constitutional Under the First Amendment

Westlaw Today (Thomson Reuters); Law stated as of 22 Feb 2021; USA (National/Federal); by Practical Law Government Practice

My Thoughts

 

A reading of the majority opinion in the Woodring case indicates that the 7th Circuit used the incorrect approach. Longstanding and historical tradition is only acceptable regarding non-secular symbols. Nativity scenes, reindeer, and Santa Claus (St. Nicholas) are only longstanding and historical traditions for Christians. Non-Christians have always viewed these symbols.

 

The "Establishment Clause", as originally intended by the Founders (See the above analysis and quotes by Jefferson, Madison, and Adams), that longstanding and historical symbols of one religion should not be promoted/displayed on government property in the absence of similar symbols of other religions or the non-religious. 

 

From the dissenting opinion by Circuit Judge Hamilton:

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021)  Section II. C. Source of Difficulties (pp 39 - 41)

Christians have long celebrated Christmas to honor and worship the birth of Jesus Christ. The Christmas holiday and season have spread in commercial and cultural ways far be-yond the religious origins of Christmas. Private displays of Nativity scenes, Christmas lights, Santa Claus and his rein-deer and elves, and related images (angels, bells, carolers, stars, candy canes, etc.) saturate our culture every December.

 

For some Christians, it can be difficult to accept the secular appropriation of the religious center of Christmas for a holiday that emphasizes shopping along with generosity. For other Christians, it can be difficult to remember that not everyone shares their faith or appreciates the religious roots of the celebration. And for believers in other faiths, explicit government recognition of the birth of the Christian Messiah may plainly imply an official endorsement of Christian superiority and dominance over their own faiths.

 

Religious freedom and dissent were central forces shaping the British colonies in North America that became the United States of America. The religious freedom and diversity at the heart of the American experiment have continued to shape our history, from the Puritans in Plymouth and dissenters in Rhode Island to the Society of Friends and other faiths in Pennsylvania, from the first and second Great Awakenings to Brigham Young and the founding of Utah, and from the Social Gospel of the early twentieth century to the Civil Rights movement and the recent rise of politically conservative evangelical Christianity.

 

Throughout American history, dominant religious groups (usually Christian but not always) have been tempted to harness the power and resources of federal, state, and local governments to promote their faiths. And since the early to mid-twentieth century, courts have enforced the Establishment Clause by limiting government promotion of religion in myriad ways while leaving room for governments to recognize the deep roots of religion in our history and culture.

 

From Woodring v. Jackson County, Indiana, No. 20-1881, 7th Cir. (2021) Section II. D. Focusing on the Facts—Endorsement in Full Context (p42)

... [T]he lower federal courts are best advised to focus less on theory and doctrine and more on facts, which provide our surest guide. The Nativity scene cases provide guidance that should be clear enough. Stand-alone Nativity scenes on government property will be enjoined. They send a mes-sage of government endorsement of a particular faith. Nativity scenes that are part of broader holiday displays including substantial secular elements and/or symbols of other religious traditions and seasonal holidays will not be enjoined.

 

The facts and cases may be arrayed roughly along a spectrum ranging from stand-alone Nativity scenes to those that are small parts of much broader seasonal displays. There is not a sharp line. It’s not as simple as counting whether there are more shepherds and angels than elves and snowmen. But the broad principle against government endorsement of particular religions provides a workable standard. If the display is dominated by religious symbolism, with only minor or to-ken secular symbols and symbols of other faiths, the message of endorsement calls for court intervention.

Source Materials