SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 10 2008, 04:09pm EDT
Contact:
(202) 466-3234
Supreme Court's Commandments Lawsuit Should Have Been Litigated on Church-State Grounds, Says Americans United
Church-State Watchdog Group Urges Justices to Require Government Neutrality Toward Religion
WASHINGTON
A Ten Commandments lawsuit to be heard this week by the U.S. Supreme
Court inappropriately focuses on free-speech rights rather than
church-state separation, says Americans United for Separation of Church
& State.
The justices will hear oral arguments Wednesday in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum.
The case tests whether Pleasant Grove City, Utah, can accept a
Commandments monument for permanent display in a local park while
turning down a monument showing the tenets of another faith. The Summum
religion sued the local government after its display was rejected.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Summum had a
free-speech right to display its monument next to the Commandments
monument.
Normally when the government discriminates against one faith while
preferring another, a lawsuit would be filed charging a violation of
church-state separation. In this situation, due to roadblocks in
pre-existing 10th Circuit law, attorneys for Summum made their argument
based on First Amendment free-speech principles, not Establishment
Clause grounds.
Americans United is sympathetic to Summum's plight, but is concerned
that Summum's free-speech argument could weaken church-state separation
legal doctrine.
The watchdog group filed an amicus brief
in support of neither Pleasant Grove City nor Summum and requests the
Supreme Court to reverse the lower court's decision. That way, Summum
can re-litigate this case under the framework of church-state
separation.
"Our Constitution requires the government to remain religiously
neutral," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive
director. "Government officials should never favor one faith over
others.
"Pleasant Grove City should never have approved the Commandments
display in the first place," said Lynn. "If the city had said no as it
should have done, we wouldn't be facing this mess at the Supreme Court."
Lynn, however, urged the justices to approach the case with great caution.
"If the Supreme Court lets Summum's free-speech argument stand," he
said, "it could open the door for government to use private speakers to
spread a particular religious belief.
"It would also mean if the government allows any group to erect a
permanent monument on its land, it must allow all proposed monuments to
be erected with no restrictions," he continued. "This could lead to
groups putting up permanent monuments promoting hateful messages on
public land throughout the country.
"Summum should have the chance to re-argue this case under the
correct legal doctrine of church-state separation," Lynn concluded.
"Let's hope the Supreme Court comes to the right conclusion here."
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.
LATEST NEWS
With Help From Trump-GOP Law, At Least 88 Big US Corporations Paid $0 in Federal Income Tax Last Year
The companies avoided more than $26.7 billion in income taxes last year, enough to give free school lunches to every child in America.
Apr 14, 2026
Dozens of America's most profitable corporations avoided paying any federal income taxes in 2025, according to an analysis out on Tuesday from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
The 88 companies—which include Tesla, Southwest Airlines, Live Nation, Palantir, Citigroup, and many others listed in the S&P 500—brought in a collective $105 billion in pretax income last year.
ITEP found that 2025 saw a spike in corporate tax avoidance, enabled in part by new loopholes created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by President Donald Trump and by his 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the corporate tax rate to 21% from its previous 35%.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is expected to hand the wealthiest 1% of Americans $117 billion in tax cuts this year, while those in the bottom 95% are set to pay more in taxes while facing across-the-board cuts to social safety net programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
It also allowed multimillion- and billion-dollar corporations to find new ways to avoid paying taxes. More than half of the tax-avoiders listed in the report used a provision in the new tax law allowing companies to immediately write off capital investments, reducing their collective taxes by $11.4 billion.
Pharmaceutical and tech companies, meanwhile, were able to take advantage of tax write-offs for research and development, exempting them from approximately another $4.4 billion.
In total, the corporate tax avoidance documented in 2025 by the researchers helped to rob the public coffers of yet another $26.7 billion, enough to give every public school student a free lunch for a year, according to a University of Missouri analysis of the National School Lunch Program.
The researchers said that the full scale of corporate tax avoidance remains unclear, since corporate tax returns are not publicly available. Some companies were also excluded because they are not part of the S&P 500 or have not yet reported their 2025 taxes.
“These findings are not isolated cases—they reflect systemic deficiencies in the corporate tax code,” said Amy Hanauer, the executive director for ITEP. “Without meaningful reform, profitable corporations will continue to pay less than their fair share.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Are at a Dangerous Precipice': Raskin Bill Would Create Commission to Examine President's Fitness
"We have a solemn duty to play our defined role under the 25th Amendment by setting up this body to act alongside the vice president and the Cabinet."
Apr 14, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) on Tuesday unveiled legislation that would establish a congressional commission tasked with determining whether the president is able to continue executing the duties of the office.
The bill, titled the Commission on Presidential Capacity Act, would also set up "expedited" emergency procedures under which Congress could activate the newly created commission and fast-track its consideration of presidential fitness.
As envisioned by Raskin, this commission would act as a legislative counterpart to the US vice president and the president's Cabinet, which the text of the 25th Amendment grants the power to declare the president incapacitated. The 25th Amendment also gives that power to a majority "of such other body as Congress may by law provide."
"The Constitution explicitly vests Congress with the authority to create a body that will guarantee the successful continuity of government by responding to presidential incapacity to discharge the powers and duties of office," said Raskin. "We have a solemn duty to play our defined role under the 25th Amendment by setting up this body to act alongside the vice president and the Cabinet."
Raskin pointed to Trump's recent erratic behavior to argue that Congress needed to take a more assertive role in determining whether he has the mental capacity to serve in the most powerful office in the federal government.
"Public trust in Donald Trump’s ability to meet the duties of his office has dropped to unprecedented lows," the Maryland Democrat said, "as he threatens to destroy entire civilizations, unleashes chaos in the Middle East while violating Congressional war powers, aggressively insults the pope of the Catholic Church, and sends out artistic renderings online likening himself to Jesus Christ."
Raskin went on to warn that "we are at a dangerous precipice, and it is now a matter of national security for Congress to fulfill its responsibilities under the 25th Amendment to protect the American people from an increasingly volatile and unstable situation."
Fifty House Democrats signed on as original co-sponsors of Raskin's bill, which is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled US House of Representatives.
Calls for invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office grew louder last week after Trump declared that "a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again," unless Iran agreed to meet his demands.
In a letter sent to congressional leaders on Monday, four psychiatrists warned that Trump's "behavior and rhetoric... have crossed a threshold that demands the immediate and bipartisan attention of Congress."
The psychiatrists added that Trump "exhibits what forensic mental health experts have, across dozens of independent assessments, identified as the 'Dark Triad' of personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Very Dark Picture': IMF Warns Trump's Iran War Could Unleash Global Recession
One expert called the new IMF forecast "extremely concerning for the global economy," noting that "the most dire impacts of our economic situation will be felt by the poor and the vulnerable."
Apr 14, 2026
The International Monetary Fund warned Tuesday that the US-Israeli war on Iran could slow global economic growth, stoke inflation, and increase the possibility of a worldwide recession and energy crisis.
The illegal war of choice on Iran being waged by US President Donald Trump and the government of fugitive Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already had wide-ranging negative impacts on the global economy, from soaring fuel prices caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to supply chain disruptions and financial market volatility.
However, a major global economic crisis has thus far been averted. That could soon change.
"Despite major trade disruptions and policy uncertainty, last year ended on an upbeat note," International Monetary Fund director of research Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas wrote in an analysis of the IMF's latest World Economic Outlook report. "The private sector adapted to a changing business environment, while powerful offsets came from lower US tariffs than originally announced, some fiscal support, and favorable financial conditions coupled with strong productivity gains and a tech boom."
"Despite some downside risks, the momentum was expected to carry over into 2026, lifting the pre-conflict global growth forecast to 3.4%," Gourinchas continued. "War in the Middle East has halted this momentum. The closing of the Strait of Hormuz and serious damage to critical facilities in a region central to global hydrocarbon supply raise the prospect of a major energy crisis should hostilities continue."
The IMF said that even if the war ends quickly, lasting damage to the world's economy will still happen.
According to the IMF report:
Under the assumption of a limited conflict, global growth is projected at 3.1% in 2026 and 3.2% in 2027, below recent outcomes and well under pre-pandemic averages. Global inflation is expected to tick up in 2026 and resume its decline in 2027. Pressures are concentrated in emerging market and developing economies, especially commodity importers with preexisting vulnerabilities. Risks are decisively on the downside. A prolonged conflict, deeper geopolitical fragmentation, disappointment over [artificial intelligence]-driven productivity, or renewed trade tensions could weaken growth and unsettle markets. High public debt and eroded policy buffers add vulnerability. Policies should foster adaptability, enhance credibility, and reinforce international cooperation.
The IMF said that "the shock’s ultimate magnitude will depend on the conflict’s duration and scale—and how quickly energy production and shipment normalize once hostilities end," and that effects will vary by location.
"Countries will feel the impact differently," Gourinchas wrote. "As in past commodity-price surges, importers are highly exposed. Low-income and developing economies—especially those with vulnerabilities and limited buffers—are likely to be hit hardest. Gulf energy exporters will face economic fallout from damaged infrastructure, production disruptions, export constraints, and weaker tourism and business activity. Remittances will fall in countries that supply migrant workers to the region."
Eric LeCompte, executive director of the religious development group Jubilee USA Network and a United Nations finance expert, called the new IMF forecast "extremely concerning for the global economy," lamenting that "the most dire impacts of our economic situation will be felt by the poor and the vulnerable."
The new report comes as the IMF's annual Spring Meetings are underway in Washington, DC.
“World leaders coming to Washington are receiving a very dark picture of the global economy,” said LeCompte. “The war is causing greater poverty and increases in our fuel and food costs."
Other groups have also warned of the adverse economic effects of the US-Israeli war on Iran.
Ben May, Bridget Payne, and Paul Moroz of Oxford Economics recently published a report warning that a longer war in Iran "could tip the global economy into recession."
In such a situation, "the Gulf states suffer most acutely—GDP down over 8% in 2026—before rebounding sharply as production recovers," they wrote. "Advanced Asian economies, which are especially reliant on Gulf oil, take a heavy blow from energy import cost surges and supply chain disruption."
"Europe faces a painful squeeze on gas and electricity," the trio added. "The US fares somewhat better given its domestic energy production, but an equity market decline of nearly 20% weighs heavily on consumer spending."
Some US-based organizations have focused on the war's domestic economic impacts.
Dean Baker, a senior fellow at the Center for Economic Policy Research, published an analysis earlier this month asserting that "making enemies makes us poorer."
"Secretary of Defense (or War) Pete Hegseth seems to be having a really great time killing people in Iran, but his live action video games come at a big cost—not just in lives, but in budget dollars," Baker wrote. "To be clear, the main reason to oppose this pointless war is its impact on the people of Iran and elsewhere in the region. But it also has a huge economic cost that is seriously underappreciated."
"In addition to reducing our security and jeopardizing the well-being of people around the world, Donald Trump’s belligerence will cost us a huge amount of money," he said. Focusing on US military spending, Baker noted that "Trump wants the country to spend 5% of GDP, or $1.5 trillion a year, on the military. This comes to $12,000 per household."
Trump and his Republican Party are seeking to offset some of their record military spending with devastating cuts to social programs upon which tens of millions of Americans rely. Already reeling from the biggest cuts to Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program spending in those programs' histories, Trump’s budget request for fiscal year 2027 contains $73 billion in total reductions in nondefense spending.
"It is striking to see that Congress might be willing to quickly cough up this money," said Baker, referring to military funding, "when it has refused far smaller sums that could have made a huge difference in the lives of tens of millions of people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular