In observance of U.S. Constitution Day, Professor of Law Paul Finkelman spoke to 40 people in Olin Library’s Smith reading room Thursday about the separation of church and state.

Finkelman is the Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Tulsa College of Law. He was the chief expert witness in the Alabama Ten Commandments case, and Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens cited his work in an opinion by last year.

Constitution Day commemorates the signing of the Constitution on September 17, 1787. Although it is lesser-known than Independence Day or Presidents’ Day, a law ratified last year by the Senate requires that all federally assisted universities provide Constitution Day programs. As the first annual Constitution Day speaker at Wesleyan, Finkelman expressed his support of the program as a way to get students to think about the impact the Constitution has on them.

“It is particularly important this year because we are in the middle of a war, we have a Supreme Court confirmation coming up, and the nation is rethinking the role of the national government in helping states in a time of crisis.” Finkelman said.

Finkelman was invited to speak at Wesleyan by University Librarian Barbara Jones.

“President Bennet asked me to make sure that Wesleyan observed Constitution Day, and I knew Paul from the American Society for Legal History,” Jones said. “He is just a fantastic lecturer.”

Todd Brewster, a visiting instructor in government, introduced Finkelman, and emphasized the importance of reading and studying the Constitution at all levels of education.

“Studies show many high school students display ignorance, even hostility toward the Constitution when it is presented in its component parts,” Brewster said.

Finkelman began his lecture on a light note, poking fun at conservatives, extremists, and even his current place of residence.

“I live in Oklahoma, and I commute back to the United States whenever I can,” Finkelman said.

The serious bulk of Finkelman’s talk focused on the issue of displaying the Ten Commandments on public property.

“People who argue for the commandments are not arguing for history,” Finkleman said. “Quite the contrary, they are arguing to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of the country with the backing of the government. That, to me, is about as unconstitutional as you can get.”

Finkelman ran through the arguments used by proponents of displaying the Ten Commandments, pointing out flaws and oversights he saw in their arguments. His main argument against the display of the Ten Commandments is the conflicts that arise over the version of the Commandments themselves. Handouts were supplied to the crowd listing the versions of the Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, and Lutheran Ten Commandments to emphasize the conflict that would arise even among followers of the same basic commandments.

“When a city or county puts up a monument, that person is taking sides in a battle that has been going on since Martin Luther,” Finkelman said.

Finkelman dismissed the argument that the Ten Commandments are civil religion, applicable to all people. He found hypocrisies between that concept and the actual state of American society and culture.

“The entire American economy is based on coveting your neighbor’s house, ox, and even wife,” Finkelman said. “Entire industries are built out of coveting.”

Finkelman described the origin of many of the Ten Commandments monuments in America, including Austin, Tex. A group called the Fraternal Order of the Eagles took up the task of distributing these monuments across the country in the 1950s. For funding they went to an unlikely source: Hollywood. Cecil B. DeMille, who at the time was promoting his new movie, “The Ten Commandments,” supplied the group with money and even sent his stars out to the spots where the commandments were set up. Finkelman quipped that perhaps, in this sense, the monuments were constitutional.

“They are not religious; they are commercial,” Finkelman said.

Many students responded well to Finkelman’s arguments and tone.

“He was amusing and irreverent,” said Ben Magarik ’06. “I thought it was a pretty candid and informal talk; the kind of thing you want at a university.”

Some students applauded the effort to raise awareness of the little-known holiday.

“I support Constitution Day,” said Aaron Tabak ’08. “The government has been quick to trample the Constitution lately.”

The lecture was followed by a short question and answer section and a reception.