[1] O'Connor wrote: The Establishment Clause prohibits government from making adherence to a religion relevant in any way to a person's standing in the political community.
[...] The proper inquiry under the purpose prong of Lemon, I submit, is whether the government intends to convey a message of endorsement or disapproval of religion.
[3] In this context the Seventh Circuit stated that “[t]he three-pronged test set forth by the Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602 (1971), remains the prevailing analytical tool for the analysis of Establishment Clause claims.”.
Pennsylvania Judge John E. Jones III cited the endorsement test in his 2005 decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
In a case where the school board required biology teachers to read a statement to the students about intelligent design as an alternative explanation to evolution, he wrote "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause."