Barry, I believe the Supreme Court ultimately will conclude that the plaintiff did not have legal standing here - that this challenge was legally flawed from the very start.
Merely being 'offended' does not give the plaintiff a legal green light to go to court to challenge this memorial. As you know, just because the 'standing' issue did not receive a lot of attention during oral argument does not mean the Justices are ignoring it. They won't and in the end I believe our side will carry the day on this issue.
Second issue: the Establishment Clause question. Does the placement of a cross on what was once public land - but now private land - constitute a violation of the Establishment Clause? I believe the answer is 'no' and I am hopeful that's what a majority of the court will determine.
Filed Under: Chief Justice Roberts,
Establishment Clause,
First Amendment,
Mojave Cross,
New York Times,
news,
Peter J. Eliasberg,
Pleasant Grove City v. Summum,
politics,
Supreme Court of the United States,
Ten Commandments
Barry, it was good to see you today. I always enjoy an opportunity to sit next to you during oral arguments at the Supreme Court - especially with a case like the one we witnessed today.
As we both know, this case is closely watched and involves the display of an 8-foot cross on a mountain top in California's Mojave Desert - a memorial honoring war veterans. The case is Salazar, Secretary of the Interior, et al., v. Buono. (08-472)
Like most of these cases, the Justices were divided on this issue. And, Justice Kennedy, who is often the deciding vote in these church/state cases, said little to reveal how he will vote on this case.
Filed Under: Congress,
Constitution,
Establishment Clause,
Justice Kennedy,
Mojave Cross,
Mojave Desert,
news,
politics,
Salazar v. Buono,
Supreme Court of the United States,
Veterans of Foreign Wars
Barry, you're missing the point of memorial crosses like those at the Mojave National Preserve, Mount Davidson, Mount Soledad, and thousands of other places across the country. They are not designed to honor God but rather to memorialize the fallen soldiers or civilians in whose memory they are dedicated.
As you know, many of these memorials date back almost a century to the aftermath of World War I while others were dedicated shortly after World War II or during the Korean War. The Argonne Cross and the Canadian Cross of Sacrifice have been part of the landscape of Arlington National Cemetery for decades. The amount of public funds spent to maintain memorials is minimal in many cases, as the veterans organizations who first created them often donate their own time and money to help with their upkeep. The Hein case properly recognized that taxpayer standing in Establishment Clause cases should not be viewed expansively and emphasized that it is a narrow exception to the general rule that taxpayers do not have legal standing to challenge the government's expenditure of tax dollars.
Filed Under: Arlington National Cemetery,
Canadian Cross of Sacrifice,
Constitution,
Establishment Clause,
Hein case,
memorial crosses,
memorials,
Mojave National Preserve,
Mount Davidson,
Mount Soledad,
news,
politics,
The Argonne Cross