with a secular curriculum, such as through the objective study of history, ethics or comparative religion. See Stone, 449 U.S. at 42, 101 S.Ct. 192; Sch. Dist. Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225, 83 S.Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d 844 (1963) (“... [Sjtudy of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may ... be effected consistently with the First Amendment.”). Several factors are relevant when assessing whether the Ten Commandments have been presented objectively and integrated with a secular message: the content of the displays, the physical setting in which the Ten Commandments are displayed and any changes that Defendants have made to the displays since their inception. See Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist., 530 U.S. at 315, 120 S.Ct. 2266 (<HOLDING>); Adland, 307 F.3d at 481 (in assessing state’s
holding that schools original policy on studentled prayer which unquestionably violated the establishment clause was relevant to determining constitutionality of modified policy because the courts inquiry not only can but must include an examination of the circumstances surrounding its enactment holding no violation of federal establishment clause holding that  1983 plaintiff conceded existence of disputed agency policy only to the extent that he challenged the constitutionality of that policy but not for purposes of other claims holding that adolescent family life act on its face did not violate the establishment clause but remanding for examination of the constitutionality of particular applications holding that federal law can provide source of state public policy for determining whether discharge of employee violated clear mandate of public policy