To state Rep. Matthew Hill, his legislation authorizing local governments to display the Ten Commandments along with other historical documents is not about religion. It?s about history.

Just look around his office, he said. There?s an original Tennessee state flag. A framed copy of a David Crockett letter. A painting of historic Jonesborough, his hometown.

?We?re not talking about holding a church service. We?re not talking about having a Bible study at the courthouse,? said Hill, R-Jonesborough. ?What we?re talking about is remembering who we are, where we came from and not being ashamed of that.?

But not everyone agrees. The bill ? HB 2658 ? could put Tennessee once again at the center of the ongoing debate about whether it violates the U.S. Constitution to display the Ten Commandments on public property.

Critics say the legislation is aimed at courting religious voters and could violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

?This bill is inviting Tennessee governments to walk into a constitutional minefield and risk litigation,? said Alex Luchenitser, associate legal director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which wrote a letter of opposition to Hill?s legislation.

For more than a decade, local governments across the state have grappled ? and in some cases battled in court ? with the issue.

Rutherford County put up the Ten Commandments in 2002 only to have a federal judge order the document?s removal after the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee sued. The county later settled the lawsuit, and officials said last week that it?s too early to say whether they will try to put up a new display.

Sumner County officials posted the Ten Commandments in early 2002, but two years later said they would remove them in the wake of court challenges in other counties.

And Hamilton County became the first in the state to face a legal challenge after putting up a stand-alone Ten Commandments monument after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. A federal judge ordered the tablets removed.

Last year, the Meigs County Commission in East Tennessee put up a display featuring the Ten Commandments along with the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence.

Hill?s new legislation allows the display of certain documents, including the Ten Commandments, Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, and U.S. and state constitutions, that ?have been recognized to commemorate freedom? and the nation?s rich history.

Signature likely

The state House approved the bill 93-0 on March 19, and the Senate followed with a 30-0 vote on Monday.

The legislation now goes to Gov. Bill Haslam?s desk for review and signature. ?I anticipate he?ll sign it,? spokesman David Smith said by email Wednesday.

The legislation authorizes local governments to put up displays containing the documents but does not specify which ones or how many to include.

Hill said he introduced the bill after he kept reading about groups such as the ACLU suing local governments over the issue.

He said he believes his legislation will provide the ?statutory cover so that locals don?t have to be afraid of being intimidated anymore by these special interest groups.?

The ACLU did not voice opposition to the bill as it worked its way through the General Assembly, Hill said.

?I think that speaks volumes to the constitutionality and how sound this legislation is,? said Hill, whose East Tennessee district includes Jonesborough, Johnson City and Midway. ?Does that mean no one will ever, ever sue? This is America. You can sue because it?s Tuesday.?

Context important

Even with the new state legislation, whether the displays can pass legal muster will depend largely on how local governments decide to post the Ten Commandments, legal experts said.

The courts will look at not only what other documents are included in the displays but also the intent and legislative history in a particular county, said Kathleen Flake, an attorney and professor of American religious history at Vanderbilt University.

?This has become a kind of subtle display of religious preference,? she said. ?Depending on how subtle it is, they get away with it. If it is not so subtle, the court tells them to go back and try again.?

If the Ten Commandments are the only documents put on display, the courts have generally considered those an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. But if the Ten Commandments are put up on equal footing with other documents and the intent is to provide historic context or education, the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears Tennessee cases, have ruled those displays constitutional.

For instance, the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that a McCreary County, Ky., display that included other documents was unconstitutional because local officials had a religious motivation behind putting up the Ten Commandments, said Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a conservative policy and legal nonprofit.

In another Kentucky case, the 6th Circuit in 2010 upheld a very similar display ? dubbed the Foundations of American Law and Government ? constitutional since there was no history of religious intent.

Staver, who argued the McCreary County case before the U.S. Supreme Court, said there is evidence that the Ten Commandments have played a historic role in shaping law and policy.

The tablets are depicted in sculptures throughout the U.S. Supreme Court?s building in Washington, and a Georgia county includes them in a seal, Staver said.

?It?s because through time it has become a synonymous symbol of the rules of law,? he said.

National movement

It isn?t just Tennessee and Kentucky that have dealt with the issue. The Ten Commandments have gone up across the nation. In a high-profile case, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore refused a federal order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building.

Legislation has been introduced in Alabama this year that would change the state constitution to allow the Ten Commandments on public property. Likewise, in Georgia this year, the state House approved 161-0 a bill allowing Foundations of American Law and Government displays in public buildings. The Georgia Senate approved the legislation 41-9 on Friday.

Staver said he fully expects the issue to at some point return to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Still, Americans United will be watching how the issue plays out, and so will the ACLU of Tennessee.

?Historical documents and what they mean to our communities are very important, but you have to step back. Why is there such a movement to get these displays up on the wall of public buildings?? said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee.

?Unfortunately, we need to remember when you post religious documents in public buildings, you are broadcasting a divisive message to the religiously pluralistic community.?

Issue often divisive

For those on both sides of the Ten Commandments debate, the new legislation is either a welcome move or a bad memory.

June Griffin, a Dayton, Tenn., activist who crisscrosses the state urging the display of the documents, said she resents how the courts have weighed in. Posting the Ten Commandments is what Tennesseans want, she said.

On Monday night, Griffin was in Marshall County presenting county commissioners with a framed copy of the Ten Commandments, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence.

?I?m glad for it,? she said of Hill?s legislation. ?It is a breath of fresh air.?

Not so for Murfreesboro resident Steve Cates. He was one of the original plaintiffs when the ACLU sued Rutherford County for putting up the Ten Commandments.

?Put the Ten Commandments on your shirt. Put them on your house. But leave public facilities alone,? the 71-year-old retired teacher said. ?We are a very diverse community here, very diverse, and let?s respect the rights of others.

?I can?t believe in 2012 I have lived to see this all play out again,? he said.

Hill said it is up to local governments to decide how to proceed but he personally would like to see the Ten Commandments put up throughout the state. They contain foundational principles, he said.

?That is not a religious statement,? Hill said. ?It is not meant to set up a theocracy or convert anybody. It is history.?