COUNTRY OF ALLEGHENY v.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU)

57 LW 504
1989
Non-establishment of religion; Government endorsement to crèche and menorah

FACTS:
The case revolves around the constitutionality of two recurring holiday displays
located on public property in Pittsburgh:
1. a crèche (nativity scene) placed on the Grand Staircase of the Allegheny County
Courthouse, and
2. an18-foot Hanukkah menorah (nine-branched candlestick holder which is a traditional
symbol of Judaism) placed just outside the City-County building, next to a 45-foot
Christmas tree and a “Salute to Liberty” sign.

Since 1981, the county has permitted the Holy Name Society, a Roman Catholic
group, to display the crèche during Christmas season which features the birth of Jesus in a
manger in Bethlehem and an angel bearing a banner that proclaims “Gloria in Excelsis Deo.”
Aside from the crèche, a fence, red and white poinsettias, and two (2) small evergreen trees
were also displayed in the Grand Staircase.

Consequently, the City-County building is a separate building and located a block

away from the county courthouse. For years, the building had a large Christmas tree outside
the Grant Street entrance and since 1982, the city has expanded its Grant Street holiday
display to include a symbolic representation of Hanukkah. It added an 18-foot menorah with
an abstract tree-and-branch design which was owned by Chabad, a Jewish group.

On 10 December 1986, the Greater Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Civil

Liberties Union and seven local residents filed suit against the county and the city, seeking
permanently to enjoin the county from displaying the crèche in the county courthouse and the
city from displaying the menorah in front of the City-County Building.

ISSUES:
1. Whether display of the crèche, in their respective “particular physical settings,” has
the effect of endorsing or disapproving religious beliefs, thus violating the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

2. Whether the display of the menorah, in their respective “particular physical settings,”
has the effect of endorsing or disapproving religious beliefs, thus violating the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

HELD:
In Lemon v. Kurtzman, the court formulated three “tests” for determining whether a
government practice violates the Establishment Clause. A statute or practice which touches
upon religion, if it is to be permissible under the Establishment Clause,
a) Must have a secular purpose;
b) Must neither advance nor inhibit religion in its principal or primary effect; and
c) Must not foster an excessive entanglement with religion.

In a 5-4 decision, the court decided against the crèche, while in a 6-3 decision, the
court upheld the constitutionality of the menorah.

Prepared by: Alyssa Mae G. Cayaba

 1. YES. The crèche VIOLATES the Establishment Clause.

Every government practice must be adjudged in its unique circumstances to determine

whether it endorses religion. In a similar case, Lynch v. Donnelly, the Court upheld the
inclusion of the crèche in the Pawtucket display. However, Lynch is not applicable in this
case because the constitutionality of the crèche in that case depended upon its “particular
physical setting.” The crèche in Lynch was displayed along with purely secular symbols and
thus negates any message of endorsement of Christian beliefs.

The crèche in this case uses words, as well as the picture of the nativity scene, to make its
religious meaning unmistakably clear. “Glory to God in the Highest!” says the angel in the
crèche—Glory to God because of the birth of Jesus. This praise to God in Christian terms is
indisputably religious. The crèche in Lynch has different objects, each with its own focal
point. But here, the crèche stands alone: it is the single element of display on the Grand
Staircase. It was also placed in a location that is the main part of the building that is the seat
of the county government. It sends a message that the government supports Christian beliefs.

In sum, Lynch teaches that government may celebrate Christmas in some manner and
form, but not in a way that endorses Christian doctrine. Here, Allegheny County has
transgressed this line. It has chosen to celebrate Christmas in a way that has the effect of
endorsing a patently Christian message: Glory to God for the birth of Jesus Christ.

2. NO. The menorah DOES NOT VIOLATE the Establishment Clause.

The menorah is a religious symbol: it serves to commemorate the miracle of the oil. But
its message is not exclusively religious. The menorah is the primary visual symbol for a
holiday that, like Christmas, has both religious and secular dimensions.

Just as some Americans celebrate Christmas without regard to its religious significance,
some nonreligious American Jews celebrate Hanukkah as an expression of ethnic identity,
and “as a cultural or national event, rather than as a specifically religious event.”

Moreover, the menorah here stands next to a Christmas tree and a sign saluting liberty.
Placing a menorah next to a Christmas tree creates an “overall holiday setting” that represents
both Christmas and Hanukkah—two holidays, not one. It is a discrimination against Jews to
allow Pittsburgh to celebrate Christmas as a cultural tradition while simultaneously
disallowing the city's acknowledgment of Hanukkah as a contemporaneous cultural tradition.

The combined display of the Christmas tree, the sign, and the menorah simply recognizes
that both Christmas and Hanukkah are part of the same winter-holiday season, which has
attained a secular status in our society.

The tree, moreover, is clearly the predominant element in the city's display. The 45–foot
tree occupies the central position in front City-County Building; the 18–foot menorah is
positioned to one side. Thus, the menorah is understood as not a simultaneous endorsement of
both the Christian and Jewish faiths, but instead, a secular celebration of Christmas coupled
with an acknowledgment of Hanukkah as a contemporaneous alternative tradition.

Given its particular physical setting, the display of the menorah is not an endorsement of
religious faith but simply a recognition of cultural diversity.

Prepared by: Alyssa Mae G. Cayaba