context: Specifically, it is up to this Court to determine whether Defendants' inclusion of the Ten Commandments in the displays was a "purposeful or surreptitious effort to express some kind of subtle governmental advocacy of a particular religious message." To satisfy this prong of the Lemon test, Plaintiffs must show that Defendants' predominate purpose for the displays was religious.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: examining "pre-eminent purpose for posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom walls"
citation_a.sentence: See also Stone, 449 U.S. at 41, 101 S.Ct. 192 (examining “pre-eminent purpose for posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom walls”); Aguillard, 482 U.S. at 599, 107 S.Ct. 2573 (Powell, J., concurring) (“A religious purpose alone is not enough to invalidate an act of a state legislature.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 307 F.3d 480, 480
citation_b.parenthetical: "Although a totally secular purpose is not required, it is clear that the secular purpose requirement is not satisfied ... by the mere existence of some secular purpose, however dominated by religious purposes."
citation_b.sentence: See Adland, 307 F.3d at 480 (“Although a totally secular purpose is not required, it is clear that the secular purpose requirement is not satisfied ... by the mere existence of some secular purpose, however dominated by religious purposes.”) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).