<P> Relaxed zoning rules and special parking privileges for churches, the tax - free status of church property, the fact that Christmas is a federal holiday, etc., have also been questioned, but have been considered examples of the governmental prerogative in deciding practical and beneficial arrangements for the society . The national motto "In God We Trust" has been challenged as a violation, but the Supreme Court has ruled that ceremonial deism is not religious in nature . A circuit court ruling affirmed Ohio's right to use as its motto a passage from the Bible, "With God, all things are possible", because it displayed no preference for a particular religion . </P> <P> Jeffries and Ryan (2001) argue that the modern concept of separation of church and state dates from the mid-twentieth century rulings of the Supreme Court . The central point, they argue, was a constitutional ban against aid to religious schools, followed by a later ban on religious observance in public education . Jeffries and Ryan argue that these two propositions--that public aid should not go to religious schools and that public schools should not be religious--make up the separationist position of the modern Establishment Clause . </P> <P> Jeffries and Ryan argue that no - aid position drew support from a coalition of separationist opinion . Most important was "the pervasive secularism that came to dominate American public life," which sought to confine religion to a private sphere . Further, the ban against government aid to religious schools was supported before 1970 by most Protestants (and most Jews), who opposed aid to religious schools, which were mostly Catholic at the time . After 1980, however, anti-Catholic sentiment has diminished among mainline Protestants, and the crucial coalition of public secularists and Protestant churches has collapsed . While mainline Protestant denominations are more inclined towards strict separation of church and state, much evangelical opinion has now largely deserted that position . As a consequence, strict separationism is opposed today by members of many Protestant faiths, even perhaps eclipsing the opposition of Roman Catholics . </P> <P> Critics of the modern concept of the "separation of church and state" argue that it is untethered to anything in the text of the constitution and is contrary to the conception of the phrase as the Founding Fathers understood it . Philip Hamburger, Columbia Law school professor and prominent critic of the modern understanding of the concept, maintains that the modern concept, which deviates from the constitutional establishment clause jurisprudence, is rooted in American anti-Catholicism and Nativism . Briefs before the Supreme Court, including by the U.S. government, have argued that some state constitutional amendments relating to the modern conception of separation of church and state (Blaine Amendments) were motivated by and intended to enact anti-Catholicism . </P>

Supreme court and separation of church and state