In a Series of Well-Publicized Supreme Court Rulings in 2005

In a series of well-publicized Supreme Court rulings in 2005, Kentucky was required to remove the Ten Commandments posted in some of its county courtrooms. However, Texas was allowed to keep a monument on the state capital grounds that had the Ten Commandments listed. How did the Supreme Court rationalize the Kentucky circumstance as unconstitutional, but not the Texas case?

A) Texas was a sovereign nation prior to becoming a state and was allowed to retain some of its religious sovereignty.
B) Kentucky did not have the level of adequate legal representation during the proceedings as did Texas.
C) The Texas case used a newer, more modern interpretation of the Ten Commandments that was considered less controversial by the Supreme Court.
D) The Kentucky case involved religious displays inside of public courtrooms that are involuntarily visible to anyone, whereas the Texas case involved a monument with a historical context that is located on the grounds of the capitol building.
E) The Supreme Court showed its bias toward western states.