McCreary County, Kentucky, et al. v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky et al.
The Court ruled that Ten Commandments displays at two Kentucky county courthouses, challenged under the Establishment Clause, were unconstitutional.· AI-written
545 U.S. 844 · No. 03-1693 · 2004 term · Rehnquist Court
Decided Jun 27, 2005 · argued Mar 2, 2005
First Amendment · Establishment of religion
Struck down a local ordinance
Majority opinion: David Souter
The voteMajorityDissent
5–45 in the majority, 4 in dissent
4 dissents (5–4)
Affirmed. McCreary County, Kentucky, et al. lost.
What this ruling means
Affirmed: the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, so it stands (sometimes with changes the Court made to it).
McCreary County, Kentucky, et al. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Lost” means the Court did not give that side the result it asked for.
From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.
Summary
The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.
McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005), was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 2, 2005. At issue was whether the Court should continue to inquire into the purpose behind a religious display and whether evaluation of the government's claim of secular purpose for the religious displays may take evolution into account under an Establishment Clause of the First Amendment analysis.
In a suit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the displays—in this case, a Ten Commandments display at the McCreary County courthouse in Whitley City, Kentucky and a Ten Commandments display at the Pulaski County courthouse—were unconstitutional. The appeal from that decision, argued by Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel, urged reformulation or abandonment of the "Lemon test" set forth in Lemon v. Kurtzman, which has been applied to religious displays on government property and to other Establishment Clause issues.
The Supreme Court ruled on June 27, 2005, in a 5–4 decision, that the display was unconstitutional. The same day, the Court handed down another 5–4 decision in Van Orden v. Perry with the opposite outcome. The "swing vote" in both cases was Justice Stephen Breyer.
Data notes
The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.
How the justices voted
Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 2004 term. Filled: the 5 in the majority. Hollow: the 4 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.
Majority(5)
David SouterWrote the majority opinion
Sandra O'ConnorWrote a concurrence
John StevensJoined the majority
Ruth GinsburgJoined the majority
Stephen BreyerJoined the majority
Dissent(4)
Antonin ScaliaWrote a dissent
Anthony KennedyJoined a dissent
William RehnquistJoined a dissent
Clarence ThomasJoined a dissent
Data notes
Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.
Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.
The parties
Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.
- Petitioner
- McCreary County, Kentucky, et al.County government or county governmental unit, except school district (Kentucky)
- Respondent
- American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky et al.Public interest organization
- Reached the Court by
- Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes
The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.
The law at issue
The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.
- Provision
- First Amendment (establishment of religion)
- Kind of law
- Constitutional Amendment
- Decided by
- Judicial review (state level); Interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order
- Struck down
- A local ordinance, as unconstitutional
Data notes
The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.
Timeline
What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.
- Jun 27, 2005DecidedDecided · Decided 5–4: affirmed. McCreary County, Kentucky, et al. lost.
- Mar 2, 2005ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
- Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
- Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit: affirmed, with a dissent.
- Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Kentucky Eastern U.S. District Court.
Data notes
From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.
Other decisions on the same issue
32 other argued cases since 1946 on establishment of religion, newest first.
- Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission605 U.S. 238Jun 5, 2025 · 605 U.S. 238First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
- Kennedy v. Bremerton School DistrictLandmark · Freedom of religion142 S. Ct. 2407Jun 27, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 2407First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion6–36–3 band
- American Legion v. American Humanist AssociationLandmark · Freedom of religion139 S. Ct. 2067Jun 20, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 2067First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion7–27–2 band
- Town of Greece v. GallowayLandmark · Freedom of religion572 U.S. 565May 5, 2014 · 572 U.S. 565First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion5–45–4 band
- Ken L. Salazar, Secretary of the Interior, et al. v. Frank Buono559 U.S. 700Apr 28, 2010 · 559 U.S. 700First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Thomas Van Orden v. Rick Perry, in His Official Capacity As Governor of Texas and Chairman, State Preservation Board, et al.545 U.S. 677Jun 27, 2005 · 545 U.S. 677First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Jon B. Cutter, et al. v. Reginald Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, et al.544 U.S. 709May 31, 2005 · 544 U.S. 709First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
- Good News Club, et al. v. Milford Central School533 U.S. 98Jun 11, 2001 · 533 U.S. 98First Amendment6–36–3 band
- Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe, Individually and As Next Friend for Her Minor Children, Jane and John Doe, et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion530 U.S. 290Jun 19, 2000 · 530 U.S. 290First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion6–36–3 band
- Ronald W. Rosenberger, et al. v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion515 U.S. 819Jun 29, 1995 · 515 U.S. 819First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion5–45–4 band
- Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board, et al. v. Vincent J. Pinette, Donnie A. Carr and Knights of the Ku Klux Klan515 U.S. 753Jun 29, 1995 · 515 U.S. 753First Amendment7–27–2 band
- Robert E. Lee, Individually and As Principal of Nathan Bishop Middle School, et al. v. Daniel Weisman etc.Landmark · Freedom of religion505 U.S. 577Jun 24, 1992 · 505 U.S. 577First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion5–45–4 band
- County of Allegheny et al. v. American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, et al.492 U.S. 573Jul 2, 1989 · 492 U.S. 573First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, Comptroller of Public Accounts of State of Texas, et al.489 U.S. 1Feb 21, 1989 · 489 U.S. 1First Amendment6–36–3 band
- Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Kendrick et al.487 U.S. 589Jun 27, 1988 · 487 U.S. 589First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints et al. v. Amos et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion483 U.S. 327Jun 24, 1987 · 483 U.S. 327First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion9–0Unanimous band
- Bender et al. v. Williamsport Area School District et al.475 U.S. 534Mar 25, 1986 · 475 U.S. 534First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Estate of Thornton et al. v. Caldor, Inc.472 U.S. 703Jun 26, 1985 · 472 U.S. 703First Amendment8–18–1 band
- Board of Trustees of the Village of Scarsdale, et al. v. Kathleen S. McCreary et al.471 U.S. 83Mar 27, 1985 · 471 U.S. 83First Amendment4–45–4 band
- Lynch, Mayor of Pawtucket, et al. v. Donnelly et al.465 U.S. 668Mar 5, 1984 · 465 U.S. 668First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Marsh, Nebraska State Treasurer, et al. v. ChambersLandmark · Freedom of religion463 U.S. 783Jul 5, 1983 · 463 U.S. 783First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion6–36–3 band
- Larkin et al. v. Grendel's Den, Inc.459 U.S. 116Dec 13, 1982 · 459 U.S. 116First Amendment8–18–1 band
- Larson, Commissioner of Securities, Minnesota Department of Commerce, et al. v. Valente et al.456 U.S. 228Apr 21, 1982 · 456 U.S. 228First Amendment5–45–4 band
- Widmar et al. v. Vincent et al.454 U.S. 263Dec 8, 1981 · 454 U.S. 263First Amendment8–18–1 band
- Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York397 U.S. 664May 4, 1970 · 397 U.S. 664First Amendment7–18–1 band
- Epperson et al. v. ArkansasLandmark · Freedom of religion393 U.S. 97Nov 17, 1968 · 393 U.S. 97First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion9–0Unanimous band
- School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania, et al. v. Schempp et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion374 U.S. 203Jun 17, 1963 · 374 U.S. 203First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion8–18–1 band
- Engel et al. v. Vitale et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion370 U.S. 421Jun 25, 1962 · 370 U.S. 421First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion6–18–1 band
- Torcaso v. Watkins, ClerkLandmark367 U.S. 488Jun 19, 1961 · 367 U.S. 488First AmendmentLandmark9–0Unanimous band
- Two Guys From Harrison-Allentown, Inc., v. McGinley, District Attorney, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, et al.366 U.S. 582May 29, 1961 · 366 U.S. 582First Amendment8–18–1 band
- McGowan et al. v. Maryland366 U.S. 420May 29, 1961 · 366 U.S. 420First Amendment8–18–1 band
- Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing et al.Landmark · Freedom of religion330 U.S. 1Feb 10, 1947 · 330 U.S. 1First AmendmentLandmark · Freedom of religion5–45–4 band
Data notes
Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.
Official record
Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.