Georgia County Government - July 2008 - (Page 30)

LAW continued from page 29 a primarily religious purpose. Id. at 862. In McCreary, the Supreme Court looked at these factors and concluded that an objective observer would find that county officials, who were responsible for the legislation and the actual posting of the displays, acted with a primarily religious purpose. Id. at 869-74. As the Georgia law was passed by the state Legislature but can be applied by local governments, a challenge could come against the constitutionality of the statute as promulgated, against the constitutionality of the statute as applied, or both. Would an objective observer find that the Georgia Legislature acted with a secular or religious motive? What type of behavior on the part of local government officials would an objective observer find to be indicative of a religious motive? There are enough similarities and differences between the Kentucky and Georgia displays to warrant a side-byside comparison in the hopes of gaining some insight into whether the Georgia law would withstand such an inquiry and how application of the law could affect the analysis. In McCreary, the Supreme Court rejected the government’s stated purpose which was in part “to educate the citizens of the county regarding some of the documents that played a significant role in the foundation of our system of law and government.” 545 U.S. at 871 (internal quotations and citation omitted). While noting that the government’s stated purpose is usually afforded deference, the Court added that the government’s stated secular purpose must be genuine and not When government officials are discussing whether to put up a historical display, any conversations revealing a religious motive could later be seized upon by a challenger to the display. merely a “sham” or “secondary objective.” Id. at 864. In rejecting the government’s stated purpose in McCreary, the Supreme Court looked at the development of the displays and their metamorphosis from a Ten Commandments display to the historical display it ultimately became. See id. at 869-71. The initial displays consisted of large abridged text versions of the King James Ten Commandments. Id. at 851. After initial litigation, both of the counties involved passed legislation authorizing a second display on the grounds that the Ten Commandments are “the precedent legal code upon which the civil and criminal codes of …Kentucky are founded.” Id. at 853. In these second displays, other documents also were put up that, though smaller, also contained religious themes. Id. After the district court issued a preliminary injunction requiring the displays be removed, the counties put up the fi nal version that came before the Supreme Court. Id. at 855. Th is display was entitled “The Foundations of American Law and Government Display.” Id. at 856. The Supreme Court determined the claimed secular purpose to be merely a litigating position as the latest display was not the result of a new legislative authorization and the second display was not officially repudiated. Id. at 871. In promulgating O.C.G.A. § 45-13-51, the Georgia Legislature determined that there is a need to “educate and inform the public about the history and background of American Law.” O.C.G.A. § 45-13-51(a)(2). Given the Supreme Court usually affords deference to a Legislature’s stated purpose and that O.C.G.A. § 45-13-51 was not born nor altered in the midst of ongoing litigation, it is certainly plausible that the stated secular objective would be accepted by the courts. But the legislative history of O.C.G.A. § 45-13-51 raises the possibility that there is more here than initially meets the eye. Specifically, the bill’s initial purpose called for making legislative fi ndings “to recognize the religious heritage of America.” Georgia Bill History, 2006 Reg. Sess. H.B. 941. It also called for the “Secretary of State to prepare documents relative to that religious heritage” and for “the Attorney General to defend counties who display documents relative to the religious heritage of America.” Id. While the statute as passed has a stated secular purpose, the objective observer analysis involves looking beyond the statute’s stated purpose by taking into account its legislative history. As such, it is likely that a court would consider the initial 301 Perimeter Center North Suite 400 Atlanta, Georgia 30346 PH: 678-775-4800 FX: 678-775-4848 www.hdrinc.com ALPHA & OMEGA MEDICAL BILLING SERVICES, INC. Main St. Second Ave. First Ave. 524 S. Main St. P.O. Box 373 Cornelia, GA 30531 Phone 706.776.2761 Fax 706.776.2793 alphaomegambs@yahoo.com Let us show you the way to increased revenue$$ 30 GEORGIA COUNTY GOVERNMENT http://www.hdrinc.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Georgia County Government - June 2008

Georgia County Government - June 2008 Contents President’s Message County Matters Laurens, Treutlen and Wheeler Counties Work Together to Leverage Economic Development 2008 Hurricane Season Forecast to be Active GDEcD: Georgia Is Bolstering International Marketing Efforts U.S. Communities Announces Auto Parts Service Contract Energy Innovation Center Opens in Warner Robins Coweta County Uses Innovative Road Construction Techniques Counties & The Law: An Analysis of Ten Commandments Displays in Georgia Courthouses Georgia’s Grand Old Courthouses: Talbot County Extension News: Youth Summit Teaches Civic Engagement Research Corner: Train Me! NACo News: NACo Seeks Obesity Prevention Programs County Parade Index of Advertisers

Georgia County Government - June 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.