Could South Carolina public schools display “In God We Trust” under the Establishment Clause?

Plain-English summary

A South Carolina legislator asked whether displaying “In God We Trust” in public schools violated the federal Establishment Clause. In February 2002, the AG concluded that such a display was constitutional. He reasoned that the words were the national motto and, under the cases he discussed, had a ceremonial and historical role rather than necessarily conveying official endorsement of a particular religious belief.

The letter relied on then-current Supreme Court discussion, federal decisions upholding the motto and a New Hampshire court opinion about school plaques. The AG’s answer addressed a display bearing those words; it did not evaluate a particular school’s full display design or later changes in Establishment Clause doctrine. The AG-hosted PDF is a Westlaw reproduction of the letter.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

Public schools

The AG said placing the national motto in a school was constitutionally permissible under the case law discussed in the 2002 opinion.

School boards

The letter described the motto’s historical use on currency and in government, and interpreted that history as supporting a ceremonial rather than religiously coercive purpose.

Common questions

Did the 2002 AG say a school could display the motto?
A: Yes. He concluded the words “In God We Trust” could constitutionally be placed in public schools.

What reasoning did he use?
A: The opinion relied on the motto’s national and ceremonial role and cases discussing historical acknowledgments of religion.

Background and statutory framework

The letter addressed the federal Establishment Clause. It discussed Lynch v. Donnelly on official acknowledgments of religion and Lemon v. Kurtzman as a then-used constitutional test, as well as lower-court decisions on the national motto.

Citations and references

• Lynch v. Donnelly: Supreme Court decision discussed for ceremonial acknowledgment and endorsement analysis.
• Lemon v. Kurtzman: Establishment Clause test discussed in the letter.

Official title

On whether the display of the words “In God We Trust” in public schools violates the federal Constitution’s Establishment of Religion Clause.

Requester

The Honorable Daniel L. Tripp, Member, South Carolina House of Representatives.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/february-4-2002/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/D.-Tripp-02-4-2002-01236841xD2C78.pdf

Original opinion text

The Honorable Daniel L. Tripp, 2002 WL 399647(2002)

2002 WL 399647(S.CA.G.)

Office of the Attorney General
State of South Carolina

February 4,2002
*1 The Honorable Daniel L. Tripp
Member

House of Representatives
312c Blatt Building
Columbia, South Carolina 29211

Dear Representative Tripp:
You have asked whether the display of the words "In God We Trust" in the public schools violates the federal

Constitution's Establishment of Religion Clause. See, Lemon v. Kurtzman,403 U.S. 603(1973); Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984). It is our opinion that the placement in the schools of a display with the words "In God We Trust" thereupon is constitutional. Law / Analysis

The words "In God We Trust" were first placed upon the United States coins during the War Between the States. In November, 1861, Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase ordered the Director of the Mint to place a suitable motto upon United States currency, one which succinctly emphasized America's trust in God as a people. The phrase "In God We Trust" was the result.

Subsequently, in 1873, this policy of placing "In God We Trust" on United States currency was enacted into law in the form of the Coinage Act of that year. The Secretary of Treasury was authorized to "cause the motto Tn God We Trust' to be inscribed on such coins as shall admit of such motto." From 1909 onward, those words have continuously appeared on one cent coins and on ten cent coins, since 1916. All gold coins, silver dollars, half dollars and quarter dollars have employed this motto continuously from July 1, 1908 forward. In 1956, President Eisenhower approved a Joint Resolution of Congress making the words "In God We Trust" the National Motto. This historical significance of the phrase "In God We Trust" has often been recognized by the United States Supreme

Court. In Lynch v. Donnelly, supra, the Court, in upholding the creche display of the City of Pawtucket against a constitutional challenge under the Establishment Clause, recognized that "[tjhere is an unbroken history of official acknowledgment by all three branches of government of the role of religion in American life from at least 1789." In Lynch, the Court noted that "[o]ur history is replete with official references to the value and invocation of Devine guidance in deliberations of the Founding Fathers and contemporary leaders." 465 U.S. at 674. Numerous examples of the Government's "official acknowledgment" of our religious heritage in this country were enumerated. Among these are the declaration of Thanksgiving and Christmas as national holidays, the service and compensation of chaplains in both the House and Senate, the declarations by the President of a National Day of Prayer, and the phrase "One Nation Under God"in the Pledge of Allegiance. Also listed by the Court among these acknowledgments of America's religious heritage was the National Motto "In God We Trust." 465 U.S. at 676. In her concurring opinion in Lynch, Justice O'Connor, voting to uphold the City's creche display,found that Pawtucket had no more "endorsed" religion than had such governmental "acknowledgments" of religion as legislative prayers or printing "In God We Trust" on the Nation's currency. Such acknowledgments of our religious heritage serve, in the view of Justice O'Connor, "the legitimate secular purpose of solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence

WESTLAVV

('•/ 201 / Thomso!! Reuters. Tuu claim to oriainal U.S. Government Works.

1

The Honorable Daniel L. Tripp, 2002 WL 399647 (2002)

in the future and encouraging recognition of what is worthy in our society. For that reason,... these practices are not

understood as conveying government approval of particular religious beliefs." 465 U.S. at 693. Justice O'Connor's concurring opinion in Lynch is often seen as the formulation of her "endorsement" test to determine whether a measure

violates the Establishment Clause and is an alternative to the test set forth by the Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, supra,

*2 For many of these same reasons, federal circuit courts have upheld the use of "In God We Trust" as the National

Motto against an Establishment Clause challenge. See, Aronow v. U.S., 432 F2d 242 (9th Cir. 1970); Gaylor v. U.S., 74 F.3rd 214 (10th Cir. 1996); O'Hair v. Blumenthal, 462 F.Supp. 19 (W.D. Tex. 1978), affd. sub. nom., O'Hair v. Murray, 588 F.2d 1 144 (5th Cir. 1978), cert, den., 442 U.S. 930 (1979). In Gaylor, the Court cited Allegheney v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, 602-603 (1989), wherein the Supreme Court had observed that "[o]ur previous opinions have considered in dicta the motto [In God We Trust] and pledge [of allegiance], characterizing them as consistent with the proposition that government may not communicate an endorsement of religious belief."

In O'Hair, the Court likewise analyzed the National Motto under the three-pronged test of Lemon v. Kurtzman, requiring

that for a challenged law to be valid under the Establishment Clause, it must (1) reflect a clearly secular purpose, (2) having a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and (3) avoid excessive governmental entanglement in religion. The O'Hair Court held that the primary purpose of the phrase "In God We Trust" is ceremonial and neither

advances nor inhibits religion and that "it would be ludicrous to argue that the use of the national motto fosters any excessive entanglement with religion." Thus, the Court agreed with the 9th Circuit in Aronow that the Motto "'has no theological or ritualistic impact."' 462 F.Supp. at 20.

Finally, in Opinion of the Justices, 108 N.H. 97, 228 A. 2d 161 (1967), the Supreme Court of New Hampshire upheld a Bill requiring every public school to have a plaque bearing the words "In God We Trust." The Court noted that

[t]he words "In God We Trust" as a national motto appear on all coins and currency, on public buildings, and in our national anthem, and the appearance of these words as a motto on plaques in public schools need not offend the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

228 A. 2d at 164.

Conclusion

The words "In God We Trust" may constitutionally be placed in our public schools. These words comprise the National Motto of the United States of America. The phrase "In God We Trust" is found on coins and currency and on our buildings and landmarks without constitutional violation. These same words can be constitutionally placed in our schools as well.

The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly noted that the words "In God We Trust" are not an endorsement

of religion. Instead, the Court has often referred to our National Motto as an acknowledgment by government of the fundamental role of religion in America's everyday life since the founding of this Country. The words "In God We Trust" serve the nonreligious purpose of solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence in American society and recognizing the attributes of America. Three circuit courts have upheld the words "In God We Trust" as the National

Motto and the Supreme Court of New Hampshire has ruled that these words can be placed in all the public schools.
*3 Rather than an endorsement of religion, the words "In God We Trust" are a symbol of patriotic pride and an acknowledgment of America's religious heritage. Nothing in the Constitution prohibits using the National Motto "In God We Trust" to teach our children to honor and hold high the values and ideals of our Country and our love for God and country. Sincerely,

WESTLAW

2017 I homson Keuteis. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

2

The Honorable Daniel L. Tripp, 2002 WL 399647 (2002)

Charlie Condon

Attorney General
2002 WL 399647 (S.CA.G.)

End of Document

WESTIAW

C 201 7 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

<s) 2017 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

3