Religion

My impression is that SCOTUS wanted to 1) constitutionally avoid an official state religion. But 2) not all religion, outside government.

When 3) government things had religion in them? The court suggested that our founders etc.might have allowed that a vague "ceremonial deism" could be found in the government from the days of the founders. And it allowed similar old stuff 4) in old government monuments.

So the court allowed things like the money motto. on grounds that it was vague, deistic, about who God was. And it allowed existing other things as vague AND old; bits of history. So the gov didn't have to change all our money. Or chip religious phrases out of major national monuments.

See "lemon test"?

One of Trump's lawyers - Jay Sekulow (sp?) -worked on some of these cases. And abortion law? And won some for religion, in the Supreme Court.