On first blush, the Supreme Court decision on displaying the Ten Commandments looks mealy-mouthed. In popular legal parlance, it would appear the court tried to "split the baby" — look for middle ground — not realizing that if Solomon had actually split the baby he'd be considered one of the most foolish kings in history.
On closer reading, however, subtleties do come into high relief. First, the High Court was asked to decide two very separate cases. In the Kentucky case, the court felt the commandments were being displayed in order to influence decisions made by the courts. In Texas, the display was considered part of a historical display, and therefore fine. The upshot was the Supreme Court felt every display of the Ten Commandments on public property needs to be examined on a case-by-case basis. The general rule is that displays of the Decalogue on outer grounds are generally acceptable while displays inside the courthouse are not.
It was the kind of decision that angers some people, pleases others, and leaves more than few scratching their heads.
At least, on the surface, it appears to be a workable decision.
The justices were apparently painfully aware of the American culture war when they voted. Some Americans long for a return to the days when decisions — in court, business and personal relationships — were governed by religious principles. Others see the growing number of non-Christian and non-Jewish Americans and push for rules that are above spiritual faith.
Justice Antonin Scalia, in dissent, chided the court for being inconsistent. But Justice William Rehnquist sounded a high-minded note by writing, "Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment clause."
The prospect of courts having to judge each individual case involving the Commandments is a daunting thought. It will require much more time, thought, money and hassle than if the Supreme Court had come down forcefully on one side or the other. But then one-size-fits-all justice is seldom true justice. In a perfect society, in fact, every ruling would be individualized — with motives, background, precedence and dozens of other variables considered. Perhaps going case-by-case with the Ten Commandments is a good place to start.
It isn't the perfect solution. But as Solomon might agree, it's better than having to live with a bad law.