Families from a range of religious and nonreligious backgrounds, backed by civil‑liberties groups, asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Aug. 17 to review a 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld Texas’ 2025 law requiring a copy of the Ten Commandments to be displayed in each public elementary and secondary school classroom.
- Families asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a 5th Circuit decision upholding Texas’ 2025 law requiring Ten Commandments posters in every public‑school classroom.
- The 5th Circuit majority said Stone v. Graham’s Lemon‑based reasoning has been displaced by recent Supreme Court decisions emphasizing historical analysis; challengers say only the Supreme Court can overrule Stone.
- Separate state suits invoke Texas’ Religious Freedom Restoration Act and a newly adopted parental‑rights amendment; the litigation could affect classroom practices across Texas and beyond.
What the petition asks the Supreme Court to decide
The petitioners — more than two dozen families represented by groups including the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, according to reporting — say the 5th Circuit “flouted” binding Supreme Court precedent and improperly sustained a law that they contend forces public‑school children to confront permanent displays of biblical text in their classrooms.
The families argue the 5th Circuit misread the Court’s 1980 decision in Stone v. Graham, which struck down a Kentucky statute that required Ten Commandments posters in classrooms. They contend only the Supreme Court can overrule its prior decisions and that the appeals court erred by treating Stone as functionally displaced by more recent rulings, including the 2022 Kennedy v. Bremerton opinion, which emphasized historical analysis over the Lemon test.
How the 5th Circuit justified upholding the law
In April the full 5th Circuit, by a narrow 9–8 vote, upheld Texas Senate Bill 10. The majority said Stone’s reliance on the Lemon v. Kurtzman test had been undermined by later Supreme Court decisions and that the proper question is whether the statute resembles a founding‑era establishment of religion.
The appeals court majority concluded S.B. 10 does not mirror practices of an established church at the Founding because the law does not direct worship, regulate religious institutions or punish nonadherents. It also rejected analogies to a 2025 Supreme Court decision (Mahmoud v. Taylor) involving parents’ free‑exercise claims in Maryland, saying S.B. 10 authorizes no classroom religious instruction or coercive curriculum.
Claims and defenses in the litigation
The challengers say the Texas law imposes a permanent, unavoidable religious message in public classrooms and undermines parents’ ability to direct their children’s religious upbringing. Their petition argues that if mandatory Ten Commandments posters do not interfere with parental religious authority, it is hard to imagine what would.
Texas officials, including Attorney General Ken Paxton, have defended the law in earlier court proceedings, asserting the Ten Commandments reflect an important part of the nation’s heritage and that a passive display does not coerce students because teachers and students may ignore it.
Parallel state challenges and other legal fronts
Separate from the federal cases, at least three Houston mothers filed a state lawsuit in Harris County seeking to block classroom displays under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and a recently adopted Texas parental‑rights constitutional amendment. That suit argues S.B. 10 burdens parents’ rights to direct their children’s upbringing and free exercise of religion under state law.
Those plaintiffs represent diverse beliefs — including nonreligious, Sikh and multifaith households — and have asked a state court to remove posters before the school year begins, saying the displays make students feel excluded and oblige parents to rebut state‑mandated text to their children without being present.
Where this fits in the Supreme Court’s docket and jurisprudence
If the justices accept the petition, the case would put the Court squarely back into longstanding disputes over the Establishment Clause and the proper standard for evaluating government actions that touch religion. Stone (1980) applied Lemon’s three‑part test; Kennedy (2022) shifted analysis toward history and tradition. The petitioners tell the Court the 5th Circuit treated Stone as implicitly overruled without following the Court’s own procedures for doing so.
The Court had recently taken up other high‑profile religious‑liberty matters, including a 2025 decision involving parents’ rights claims in a Maryland school context and a pending case about religious schools’ participation in a Colorado tuition program, underscoring a broader recalibration in religious‑freedom doctrine in recent terms.
Practical implications if the Supreme Court hears the case
- A decision to review could clarify whether Stone remains controlling when a state enacts a measure that imposes a biblical text in classrooms, potentially affecting not just Texas but other states with similar measures.
- If the Supreme Court reverses the 5th Circuit, school districts would likely have to remove the posters and could face challenges to similar displays elsewhere.
- If the Court affirms the 5th Circuit, states may feel emboldened to enact or maintain passive religious displays in public schools, and plaintiffs would need to rely on other legal theories — including state constitutional or parental‑rights claims — to obtain relief.
Remaining uncertainties
At this stage the justices have not indicated whether they will grant review. The parties disagree over the continuing force of Stone and the proper analytical framework (Lemon‑era tests versus historical‑practice review), and the 5th Circuit’s narrow split highlights the legal contention. The federal petition asks the Supreme Court to resolve those differences; if the Court declines, the appellate ruling will stand in the 5th Circuit.
Timeline of key events
- 2022 — Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton emphasizes history and tradition over the Lemon test (reported context).
- 2024/2025 — Texas enacts S.B. 10 requiring Ten Commandments posters in public‑school classrooms (statute at issue).
- July 2025 — Multiple families and advocacy groups file federal lawsuits challenging S.B. 10 on First Amendment grounds; some plaintiffs pursue state‑law challenges as well.
- Aug. 2025 — A U.S. district judge initially blocked enforcement in targeted districts (reported in coverage).
- April 2026 — Full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds S.B. 10 by a narrow 9–8 vote.
- Aug. 17, 2026 — Petitioners file for Supreme Court review asking the justices to take the case.
What to watch next
Watch for the Court’s decision on whether to grant review; if it does, briefing and oral argument would follow next term. Observers should also track the separate state‑court parental‑rights litigation in Harris County and how school districts across Texas implement or respond to the law while litigation proceeds.
“Only this Court can overrule its own decisions, and it does not do so silently,” the petitioners wrote, arguing the 5th Circuit improperly treated Stone as displaced (petitioners’ claim as reported).
Journalists and readers should note that this article summarizes filings and reporting from the parties and courts; claims about the law’s effects, motivations or the justices’ future actions reflect positions taken by litigants and courts in the record rather than independent predictions.
