This case is about, the city of Pawtucket, Rhode Island and their public Christmas display. The display showed a crèche , with a candy cane lane that leads to Santa Claus's house, and a banner that read "Seasons Greeting"
From all of this, it lead up to Daniel Donnelly suing the city of Pawtucket, and the representative was mayor, John lynch. Mr. Donnelly challenged that the city was violating the; 1st & 14th amendments. The district court upheld the challenge and permanently enjoined the city from including the creche in the display. The Court of Appeals affirmed
The question the court will answer: Did the inclusion of a nativity scene in the city's display violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Arguments for the appellants: Notwithstanding the religious significance of the creche, Pawtucket has not violated the Establishment Clause or the first amendment, but embraced it. Pp. 672-687.
Argument for respondent: The inclusion of a distinctively religious symbol like the crèche demonstrates a sectarian purpose other than to gender the good will associated with the Christmas season. The primary effect of the inclusion of the crèche is to place a governmental approval on a religious belief exemplified by the crèche. The city is not merely using the crèche as a tradition holiday symbol, thereby purging the crèche of its religious content and conferring only an incidental and direct benefit upon religion.
My decision for this case: if I were deciding the case as a Supreme Court justice, I would go in favor for the city of Pawtucket, because they did no violate the the establishment clause of the first amendment. Religion is not to be inflicted by the government. The government is not to promote any religion either.
How I've changed as a leaner is. I've learned from this case is, to look before you jump. Mr. Donnelly is a person who makes faux pas's he did not study any of the constitution at all, is what it sounds like, to me.