Question

decision: county of allegheny v. aclu
the menorah need not be excluded from this particular display. the christmas tree alone in the pittsburgh location does not endorse christian belief, and, on the facts before us, the addition of the menorah \cannot fairly be understood to\ result in the simultaneous endorsement of christian and jewish faiths. . . . on the contrary, for purposes of the establishment clause, the city’s overall display must be understood as conveying the city’s secular recognition of different traditions for celebrating the winter - holiday season.
—justice harry blackmun,
opinion of the court,
county of allegheny v. aclu
1989
according to blackmun’s decision, why was the display of the menorah and christmas tree constitutional?
it did not include religious symbols.
it was located in the right place.
it endorsed two major world religions.
it did not communicate a religious message

Explanation:

The text from Justice Blackmun's opinion states that the display (Christmas tree and menorah) was meant to convey the city's secular recognition of different winter - holiday traditions, not a religious message. The first option is wrong as the menorah and Christmas tree are religious symbols. The second option is wrong as the location isn't the reason for constitutionality. The third option is wrong as the display wasn't about endorsing religions. The fourth option matches the idea that the display was secular and didn't communicate a religious message.

Answer:

D. It did not communicate a religious message (assuming the options are labeled A - D with A: It did not include religious symbols, B: It was located in the right place, C: It endorsed two major world religions, D: It did not communicate a religious message)