Posted on 06/25/2005 9:26:20 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
A lawyer who wants the Mount Soledad cross off public land in La Jolla filed a lawsuit yesterday to try to invalidate the July 26 election in which San Diego voters will weigh in on the contentious issue.
Attorney James McElroy wants a Superior Court judge to intervene as soon as possible. His lawsuit won't affect the mayoral election set for the same day.
City Attorney Michael Aguirre said the election on Proposition A should proceed, and a lawyer working to keep the cross in place as a war memorial called McElroy's challenge "frivolous."
Superior Court Judge Patricia Cowett, who was assigned the case, will hold a procedural hearing Tuesday morning to set a date for attorneys' arguments.
If voters approve Proposition A, the city would donate the cross and land around it to the federal government to bypass a 1991 federal court ruling that having a cross on city park land violates the state constitution.
McElroy argued in his new lawsuit that the City Council put the measure on the ballot improperly when it should have approved moving the cross to a private site.
McElroy also argues that giving the land away to save the cross is unconstitutional. He represents Philip Paulson, an atheist who has challenged the presence of the cross since 1989.
McElroy filed the lawsuit against City Clerk Charles Abdelnour and Registrar of Voters Mikel Haas, asking that both be prevented from certifying the results of Proposition A.
Failing that, McElroy wants the judge to require a two-thirds vote, instead of a simple majority, for its passage.
To make his case, McElroy points to the City Charter, which requires two-thirds voter approval for any change in use of city parkland.
"If you can't change the use unless you have a two-thirds vote, you certainly can't give it away to someone else who could change the use without a two-thirds vote," he said.
Attorney Charles LiMandri, an advocate of keeping the cross where it is, called the new lawsuit "frivolous" and said a two-thirds threshold doesn't apply because the federal government would maintain the site as a park.
Aguirre said the public should be allowed to vote, even though he believes the arrangement is unconstitutional.
"The voters have the power to make a mistake," Aguirre said. "That doesn't mean the courts can't correct it."
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
"The voters have the power to make a mistake,"
It's called democracy, stoopid. He and others of his lawyerly ilk advocate judicial correction of the majority's wishes. And it's already here sadly.
Leave it to a greedy, shyster "lawyer" to become offended by a war memorial honoring the soldiers who died to keep America free. They made the ultimate sacrifice. What has this latte-swilling, BMW-driving, shyster "lawyer" with a cellphone stuck to his ear done for this country? Absolutely nothing. This maggot defines what Rush refers to as "human debris."
Listened to Roger Hedgecock yesterday. His comment was that he and Roger's attorney consider this a " Slap" suit , that is, a nuisance suit.
Roger intends to have this suit dismissed and ask for "all costs" to be paid by McElroy.
Uh...oh... liberals don't mind suing to void any democratic election!!! It's their modus operandi choice.
I notice that they don't identify McElroy as an ACLU lawyer, which he is. The ACLU has declared war on Christianity. Anyone considering a donation to them should keep this in mind.
I guess this Lawyer missed the SCOTUS dicision.. The City Council can do anything they want with land. Private or otherwise.
Amen. There's a one-word description for the sub-human trash you portrayed: Parasite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.