what did the supreme court indicate in lynch v. donnelly? course hero

The Supreme Court decision Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984), upheld the constitutionality of a seasonal holiday display that included a manger scene, or creche, on government property, finding that it was not in violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Residents said manger scene violated First Amendment

Full Answer

What was Lynch v. Donnelly?

Donnelly (1984) upheld a religious display on government property in Rhode Island against a challenge that displaying the Christian symbols of the creche, or manger scene, was a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment. This 2007 photo is of a Nativity scene on the Arkansas state Capitol grounds that remained on display despite objections that the arrangement violated the separation of church and state. (AP Photo/Danny Johnston, used with permission from the Associated Press)

Who is Geoffrey McGovern?

Geoffrey McGovern is a political and social scientist at the RAND Corporation and an instructor in the Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie Mellon University. Send Feedback on this article.

Why is the lemon test not invalidated?

Focusing on the evil of government endorsement or disapproval of religion makes clear that the effect prong of the Lemon test is properly interpreted not to require invalidation of a government practice merely because it in fact causes, even as a primary effect, advancement or inhibition of religion.

What is the effect prong of the Lemon test?

Focusing on the evil of government endorsement or disapproval of religion makes clear that the effect prong of the Lemon test is properly interpreted not to require invalidation of a government practice merely because it in fact causes, even as a primary effect, advancement or inhibition of religion. The laws upheld in Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U. S. 664 (1970) (tax exemption for religious, educational, and charitable organizations), in McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U. S. 420 (1961) (mandatory Sunday closing law), and in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U. S. 306 (1952) (released time from school for off-campus religious instruction), had such effects, but they did not violate the Establishment Clause. What is crucial is that a government practice not have the effect of communicating a message of government endorsement or disapproval of religion. It is only practices having that effect, whether intentionally or unintentionally, that make religion relevant, in reality or public perception, to status in the political community.