Kern County board pulls Ten Commandments item after hours of public protest and legal warnings

The Kern County Board of Education on Thursday removed a proposed agenda item that would have authorized display of the Ten Commandments and related historical documents after a closed session and extensive public comment. Board officials said an additional investigation and research were needed and the item would be dropped from tonight’s agenda.

The decision followed nearly an hour of public testimony in which speakers sharply disagreed about whether the Ten Commandments belong in public schools. Sarah John, an intern reading a statement for the ACLU of Southern California, told trustees the proposed resolution would violate both the California and U.S. constitutions and could expose the county to costly litigation. “Passing this resolution would be a losing battle, and the board should not invite it,” she said, urging the district to require Liberty Council to indemnify the board for plaintiff attorneys’ fees if it proceeds with a contract.

Several parents and clergy urged the board to reject the proposal on grounds of student safety and religious neutrality. Reverend Don Wilder said the display would be “political propaganda” that could terrify nonbinary and transgender students and asked trustees to “vote no.” Gabriel Garcia, a youth organizer with the Dolores Huerta Foundation, warned the board against becoming “a battleground for someone else’s agenda” and stressed Kern County’s racial and religious diversity.

Other speakers framed the documents as historical and civic rather than religious. One attendee traced the Ten Commandments’ influence on English common law and argued the documents reflected the nation’s founding values. During the comment period former judge Robert Tafoya asked the board to publish the exact language of any future proposal so the public and legal reviewers can examine wording in advance.

Board officials had earlier confirmed that related discussions — including a potential contract with Liberty Council, a Christian legal organization identified during public comment — would be encompassed by the postponed item. The board chair said the matter requires more research before any vote and indicated the item will return to a future agenda.

The public record contains sharply conflicting assertions: community advocates and clergy offered moral, cultural and historical rationales for the documents, while civil-rights groups and interfaith speakers called attention to constitutional limits and the risk that a prominent display would endorse a single religion. Several speakers also urged the board to consider the financial exposure that a state constitutional challenge would bring.

The board did not vote on the policy tonight; the item was removed pending further investigation. Trustees did not provide an estimated date for reconsideration during the meeting.