Interesting discussion about the 10 commandment issue from a legal scholar: (excerpt copied from the CNN website)
O’BRIEN: The protesters have now said that they’ve been told this monument will move potentially to a back hallway, only visible by employees and not by the public.
How legally does this change the argument? Couldn’t someone still argue, “No, it needs to be out of the building? That’s what we wanted the first time around in our lawsuit?”
TOOBIN: It could, Soledad. That is where matters of degree get involved, and you can be sure there will be more litigation about it.
It’s a little like what you mentioned about the Supreme Court. There are — there is no prohibition on the Ten Commandments being in a government building. They’re in books all over government buildings, and they are occasionally displayed.
The question that judges have to consider is, “Is the display an endorsement of a religion?” That’s really the question. And I think most constitutional scholars believe that the current situation with the 5,000-pound monument in the middle of the courthouse is clearly an endorsement, and that’s why it’s been ordered out. If it’s in a backroom accessible only by employees, I could see a court saying that’s not an endorsement.
But the one thing you can be sure of is there will probably be more litigation about it.