Putting the Bible Back in the Courts: A Critical Analysis (Part 1)

art by: Skid Marx

By Emily Pancake1

Much ink has been spilled by the news media, legal analysts, politicians, and Twitter commentators over the United States Supreme Court’s recent rulings in First Amendment religious freedom cases of late. Critics have bemoaned the continued erosion of the Establishment Clause, while proponents have praised the Court’s dogged defense of religious freedom. And while they may disagree on the value of doing so, both sides of the political aisle generally agree that this Supreme Court is putting the Bible back in schools (Kennedy v. Bremerton, slip opinion No. 21-418 (2022)), taxpayer funding (Carson v. Makin, slip opinion No. 20-1088 (2022)), and the composition of the nuclear family (Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 141 S.Ct. 1868 (2021)).

But regardless of prophecies of doom from the left and gun-blasting declarations of victory from the right, the allegation that SCOTUS has put the Bible back in American courts is facially inaccurate. Sure, many state2 and federal3 oaths for witnesses, jurors, and public officials still include the phrase “so help me God,” but that phrase cannot be mandatory.4 And ruling in favor of religious organizations and practices does nothing to elevate the Bible over any other form of liturgy.5 If the Court does in fact intend to restore the Bible to the practice of law, it should take one simple step to prove its commitment to the cause: replace legal Latin with Biblical Hebrew.

Think about it for a moment. Latin is the language of the pagan Hellenists, and even worse, the Catholics. Hebrew is the language of the Bible, the language that Jesus spoke!6 The first ever law code was written in Hebrew by the Lord Himself. No matter that (Paul decided) Jesus came to relieve the true believers of their divine legal obligations to get circumcised and not eat bacon—the Ten Commandments, which still qualify as good precedent despite Jesus’s7 overruling of their 603 statutory counterparts8, were written in Hebrew. And in terms of Hebrew’s unique suitability to the American legal system, consider (1) the robust, precedent-based legal tradition of the Bible; (2) the range of helpful legal phrases that, unlike the Latin phrases currently in use, don’t have English counterparts; and (3) the importance of accessibility of the law to laypeople.

The following installments of this article will elaborate on each of these points. Readers may look forward to a dramatically truncated explanation of Jewish legal tradition, grossly inadequate descriptions of the intersection of Gentile and Judaic concepts of ethnicity, and more sarcastic footnotes airing the author’s personal grievances.

Footnotes

1 The author is writing under a pseudonym and is not associated with any actual Emily Pancakes. (There is at least one person named Emily Pancake out there, I was assigned to walk her dog by the pet-sitting company I worked for before law school. The dog’s name was Pete Pancake.)

2 See e.g., Delaware Const. Art. XIV; Maine Stat. tit. 14, 1216; Wisconsin Stat. 906.03(2).

3 5 U.S.C.A. 3331.

4 In 2021, Alabama amended its voter oath to include an option that voters can select to indicate that they decline to include the phrase “so help me God” in their oaths. See e.g., “Freedom From Religions Foundation drops lawsuit after Alabama amends ‘so help me God’ over oath,” AL.com, https://www.al.com/news/2021/04/freedom-from-religion-foundation-drops-lawsuit-after-alabama-amends-so-help-me-god-voter-oath.html (Apr. 7, 2021); Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961).

5 Ignore, for the sake of this argument, that the Christian Bible is the only religious text that has ever held any sway in American courts and government. Forget, for the next few moments, that the protection of religious freedoms in America has only ever served to strengthen and empower the Christian—and primarily Evangelical—right. This is a satirical piece of writing, so cut me some slack and suspend your disbelief. I know it’s a big ask, but bear with me here.

6 He didn’t, if he ever actually existed. Jesus would have spoken Judeo-Aramaic, and maybe a bit of Greek or Latin depending on how cultured and socially relevant he was. Hebrew was the holy tongue reserved for religious scholars and worship. Aramaic was the day-to-day language of Judea, and Greek was the language of Roman government administration because Latin is incredibly unwieldy. See e.g., https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27587230 (May 27, 2014); https://tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/did-jesus-speak-greek/ (Nov. 27, 2020).

7 I recognize that it’s conventionally acceptable to omit the “s” after the apostrophe in this circumstance. I don’t care. It’s wrong and you should feel bad if you do it.

8 There are 613 mitzvot, or commandments, in the Torah. The Ten Commandments are the ones that Moses got on Mount Sinai and immediately dropped because the Israelites were leaning a little far into the furry thing and worshipping a cow. Why the Christians hype up, for example, the Fifth Commandment of honoring one’s parents while discarding the numerous laws explaining how to actually do that is beyond me.