Carroll ISD rejected ‘In God We Trust’ signs. Is that legal? What’s in the Texas law?
A new Texas law requiring schools to display “In God We Trust” signs is getting attention in North Texas after an area school district rejected versions of the signs during a Monday school board meeting.
The Carroll school board declined to accept the donation of signs displaying the national motto, including one where the motto is written in Arabic and two others displaying the rainbow colors like the pride flag.
During the meeting, board president Cameron Bryan said the district didn’t have to accept the signs because they had already accepted the donations during a previous meeting and they’re in the district’s administration building and all 11 schools.
On Aug. 15, Grapevine-based Patriot Mobile, which describes itself as a conservative Christian cell phone company, donated signs to display at schools in the district. The group has invested thousands in supporting school board candidates in Carroll, Grapevine-Colleyville, Keller and Mansfield.
“The statute does not contemplate requiring the district to display more than one copy at a time,” Bryan said. “Instead, the statute requires a durable poster or framed copy which limits displays to one poster or frame copy in an effort not to overwhelm schools with donations.”
The donor, Sravan Krishna, who worked with groups that include the Southlake Anti-Racism Coalition and the Texas Bipartisan Alliance, countered:
“It doesn’t say you have to stop at one, so that is your decision to stop at one,” he said during public comment. “Why is more God not good? And are you saying you don’t have, like, one square feet of space in our buildings?”
So what does the law say? We’ve broken it down.
What’s in Texas’ ‘In God We Trust’ law?
The law says that a public school or public university or college “must” display in a “conspicuous place in each building of the school or institution a durable poster or framed copy of the United States national motto, ‘In God We Trust,’” if the poster or framed copy is donated.
But the donated sign must meet both of the following criteria for it to be required to be displayed, according to the law:
“Contain a representation of the United States flag centered under the national motto and a representation of the state flag.”
“May not depict any words, images, or other information” besides what is required by the first criterion.
The law was authored by Texas Sen. Bryan Hughes, a Mineola Republican who also authored a number of high-profile bills when lawmakers convened in 2021. They include the state’s abortion law that effectively banned abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and a law related to how race is taught in schools.
A spokesperson for Hughes did not immediately return a request for comment.
What do the signs look like?
The signs donated by Patriot mobile on Aug. 15 during a special board meeting feature the words “In God We Trust” in white font with an American flag centered below the text and Texas flags on the left and right sides of the American flag.
There were four signs presented Monday. One had “In God We Trust” written in Arabic in white lettering on a dark blue background. Below it, in the lower center of the page, is an American flag, with a Texas flag in the corner.
Two signs included rainbow colors like those seen on the rainbow flag, also called the gay pride flag. One has a dark background with most of the “In God We Trust” motto in white, except for the word “God” which is written in rainbow. The other flag has a rainbow background with white text. Below the phrase in both versions are images of the American flag and two Texas flags on either side of it.
Another sign had “In God We Trust” written in English in white font against a dark blue background, with an American flag below and Texas flags on each of its sides.
Is Southlake required to display the signs?
There are legal arguments to be made on both sides.
SMU Law Professor Dale Carpenter didn’t give a definitive answer as to whether it’s legal to reject donated signs but raised several questions and arguments that could be made.
The law doesn’t explicitly say that a school must display only one donated sign or that it has to display every sign donated, as long as it meets the requirements. But there’s an argument to be made by the district — a good argument — that the law doesn’t require schools to display multiple copies of the motto in a conspicuous location, Carpenter said. He bases that off the use of a singular “a” in the part of the law stating districts must display “a durable poster or framed copy of the United States national motto” if donated.
“There’s no other guidance about it,” he said. “I’m not certain about this answer. ... I think that’s the way the school could argue it.”
A second question is whether the posters proposed Monday comply with the law’s requirements: That the sign contain the motto, the U.S. flag, the Texas flag and no other “words, images, or other information.”
Looking at the sign with the motto written in Arabic, one could argue the sign doesn’t actually contain the United States national motto because the motto is an expression in English, not another language, Carpenter said. On the other hand, proponents of the sign could argue the law doesn’t specify the motto be written in English and the words do mean “In God We Trust.”
For the flags containing rainbow colors, it could be argued the colors have significance for LGBTQ pride and thus contain “other information,” Carpenter said. But the law doesn’t say a specific background color has to be chosen or specify what colors can or cannot be in the sign.
“I think it would be the more difficult argument for the school to make,” he said.
Carpenter said there could also be questions raised about the constitutionally of the law itself and the constitutionality of rejecting the signs.
The law professor chuckled when asked if he expects the law to end up in court.
“I always expect things to end up in court,” he said, adding that he doesn’t know whether this law will. “It’s obvious that people are making at least a political point, if not a legal point, with these donations. And the legislature itself is making a political point.”
What has the district said?
Bryan, the school board president, said the district has determined not to accept further donations after legal consultation and review of an Aug. 26 letter from Hughes, the law’s author.
“Carroll ISD has met the requirements of the law,” Bryan said in a written message provided to the Star-Telegram by the district.
In the message, Bryan makes two points to justify declining the donations:
“The statute does not contemplate requiring the District to display more than one copy at a time. Instead, the statute requires “a durable poster or framed copy,” which limits displays to one poster or framed copy in an effort not to overwhelm schools with donations.”
“The statute provides the explicit requirements for the display and does not contemplate “In God We Trust” being in any language other than English, as the statute states the display cannot depict any other words, images, or other information. This requirement limits the legally mandated display of the motto to only a poster or framed copy in English with no additional images.”
Hughes, in the letter addressed to Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath, argues the signs are only required to be displayed if the motto is in English, because that’s how it’s presented in the new law.
He later adds that nothing in state law prevents districts from displaying the motto written in another language besides English.
“The purpose of the law is to inform and remind students of the motto adopted by the United States Congress to assert the country’s collective trust in God,” Hughes said. “In pursuit of this purpose, a school is allowed to display the motto in any language it chooses. However, the law requires only the display of a poster or framed copy as specifically set out in the statute.”
When it comes to the number of signs displayed, Hughes, noted the singular “a” flagged by Bryan and Carpenter.
“This singular reference is intended to limit the required display to one poster, so that donations of the motto, whether made in good faith or bad faith, do not burden or overwhelm schools,” Hughes said. “A school is required to display a qualifying poster or framed copy if one is provided, but it is only required to display one copy.”
Hughes’ letter does not address whether he considers colors from the rainbow flag to be “other information” prohibited by the law.
