Why Did the Supreme Court Rule Differently in Lynch v. Donnelly Than in Engel v. Vitale?

The city of Pawtucket, RI, along with several local businesses, sponsored a holiday display, which includes a manger scene portraying the birth of Jesus, along with Santa Claus, reindeer, a clown, an elephant, a teddy bear, and holiday lights.

A group of citizens brought a lawsuit claiming the display violated the Constitution. In Lynch v. Donnelly (1984), the Supreme Court ruled that Pawtucket's display did not violate the Constitution in a 5-4 decision.

Which of the following best explains why the court ruled differently in Lynch v. Donnelly than it did in Engel v. Vitale (1962)?

• [A] The Engel case involved a Christian prayer
• [B] Taken as a whole, the holiday display did not advance or endorse a particular religion
• [C] The holiday display in Pawtucket was not state-sponsored
• [D] Students have fewer rights in schools than citizens have in the community

Final answer: Option C is correct. The Supreme Court ruled differently in Lynch v. Donnelly than in Engel v. Vitale because the holiday display in Pawtucket did not advance or endorse a particular religion, while the prayer in Engel v. Vitale was deemed as endorsing religion. The key difference between the cases is the context of the displays and whether they were state-sponsored.

Explanation: In Lynch v. Donnelly (1984), the Supreme Court ruled that the holiday display in Pawtucket, RI did not violate the Constitution. The Court made this decision because, taken as a whole, the display did not advance or endorse a particular religion. In contrast, Engel v. Vitale (1962) involved a Christian prayer in a public school setting, which the Court deemed as endorsing religion and therefore unconstitutional. The key difference between the two cases is the context of the displays and whether they were state-sponsored.