Federal Court Permits Louisiana’s Classroom Ten Commandments Law to Move Forward

A federal appeals court has reversed a lower court's decision and allowed Louisiana's controversial law mandating Ten Commandments displays in public school classrooms to proceed. The 5th Circuit Court ruled 11-7 that the law's constitutionality should be evaluated based on how individual school districts choose to implement it.

A federal appeals court decision on Friday has enabled Louisiana to move ahead with implementing a controversial law mandating Ten Commandments displays in every public school and university classroom throughout the state.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans reversed a lower court’s constitutional challenge by an 11-7 margin, determining that the law’s legality should be evaluated based on how individual school districts choose to carry it out.

The decision represents a significant defeat for families who filed suit against the Republican-controlled state’s legislation, claiming it violated their First Amendment religious freedoms. Legal representatives for these parents declined to provide immediate commentary.

Republican Governor Jeff Landry enacted the legislation, designated as H.B. 71, in 2024. The measure mandates that poster or framed displays of the Ten Commandments be placed in all K-12 schools and publicly funded higher education institutions.

According to Christian and Jewish traditions, the Ten Commandments were divine revelations given to the Hebrew prophet Moses.

This legislation made Louisiana the initial state to mandate such religious displays since the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a comparable Kentucky statute in 1980. Both Arkansas and Texas enacted similar legislation in 2025, though both faced legal challenges resulting in court orders blocking their implementation.

A lower court judge initially halted the law’s implementation in November 2024, and a three-member 5th Circuit panel supported that decision in October. However, the complete appeals court subsequently decided to review the case, resulting in Friday’s reversal.

In their unsigned decision, the 5th Circuit majority explained that since the law provides school districts with implementation flexibility, it cannot be declared unconstitutional across all potential applications, emphasizing that circumstances would be significant.

“We do not know, for example, how prominently the displays will appear, what other materials might accompany them, or how—if at all—teachers will reference them during instruction,” the majority wrote. “More fundamentally, we do not even know the full content of the displays themselves.”

The court’s majority, composed entirely of judges appointed by Republican presidents, characterized their decision as limited in scope, noting that future legal challenges based on actual implementation remain possible.

U.S. Circuit Judge James Dennis authored a dissenting opinion supported by five colleagues appointed by Democratic presidents, describing the majority’s decision as a “calculated stratagem” designed to circumvent Supreme Court precedents.

“By placing that text on permanent display in public school classrooms, not in a way that is curricular or pedagogical, the State elevates words meant for devotion into objects of reverence, exposing children to government‑endorsed religion in a setting of compulsory attendance,” Dennis stated in his dissent.

The legal case is identified as Roake et al v Brumley et al, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-30706.