San Diego will appeal cross ruling to Supreme Court

AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 6/22/06 | Allison Hoffman - ap

[NormsRevenge]

The city will petition the U.S. Supreme Court in a drive to exhaust every legal avenue before removing a giant concrete cross from public property on Aug. 1, the city attorney said Thursday.

The city will ask the high court to review Wednesday's decision by a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel to turn down the city's request to stay a federal court decision against the cross.

U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. found in May that the city was demonstrating an unconstitutional endorsement of one religion over others by maintaining the 29-foot cross in a municipal hilltop park. He ordered the city to pay $5,000 daily fines beginning Aug. 2 if the cross is not taken down.

Mayor Jerry Sanders, who directed City Attorney Michael Aguirre to file the petition to the Supreme Court, has said that if no legal relief is granted he will abide by Thompson's ruling in order to prevent the cash-strapped city from incurring fines.

Aguirre said that Thompson's order "essentially foreclosed" any alternative to physically moving the cross, such as covering it with a tarp.

Supporters of the cross had suggested ideas including building a wall around the monument to buy time for appeals pending in state and federal courts that might lead to a ruling allowing the cross to remain.

The cross has stood atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla for 52 years. Legal battles have been under way for 17 years.

The Supreme Court declined to hear the cross case once before, in 2003.

[rface]

wonder why the Supremes declined the case in 2003?

[GOP Poet]

I love that cross. Whenever I see it a feeling of great peace washes over me. This is so sad. I will pray.

[metmom]

For 52 years people survived living with that cross. It isn't hurting anybody, lots of people probably like it. So why should it come down now? If people don't like looking at it they can turn their eyes elsewhere.

[ncountylee]

One stinking atheist brought this about. May he rot with tookie.

[The KG9 Kid]

Anyone think that the Roberts court is in favor of removing all the crosses from Arlington National Cemetary?

[metmom]

U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. found in May that the city was demonstrating an unconstitutional endorsement of one religion over others by maintaining the 29-foot cross in a municipal hilltop park.

It's only un-Constitutional for the FEDERAL government to ESTABLISH a religion. If these folks are lawyers, why can't they read?

[DannyTN]

They should consider giving or selling the park to a charity. I think there is precedent for that.

[slykens]

Why not sell the small plot of land where the cross is to a private not-for-profit set up for the sole purpose of holding possession of that land for "conservation" purposes? Since the cross would then be on private property it would be outside of the purview of the First Amendment's restrictions. I'm sure enough donations could be had to maintain it privately.

While it is an end run around the Court's rulings I don't see how it would be illegal unless California law would prohibit it.

[Mercat]

They should bury a vet right at the base and deed it to his family. Problemo solved.

[newzjunkey]

Why not sell the small plot of land where the cross is to a private not-for-profit set up for the sole purpose of holding possession of that land for "conservation" purposes?

It was tried. Multiple times. Each time a court found a reason it wasn't legal.

[seasoned traditionalist]

If the SCOTUS declines to hear case, or does and rules against city, I suggest a MAJOR campaign to "encourage" W to sign an Executive Order designating this parcel of land as Federal Property.

[AnnaZ]

Can't wait for this one.

[sgtbono2002]

I cant think of a vile enough name to call anyone who is opposed to this cross, and I am pretty good at vile names.

[Gay State Conservative]

Is this the cross at a cemetery? If so,what religion(s) were those buried there? If they were Christians,case closed as far as I'm concerned.Ditto with a Star of David in a case where it was Jews buried there.

[Mrs.Liberty]

No, it is a cross that is on public property, property which houses a Veterans Memorial Center:

http://www.soledadmemorial.com/happening.html

[SoCalPol]

What is interesting, I see here in San Diego , Middle Eastern & Horn Of Africa Cab drivers put their prayer rugs on public sidewalks next to cab at prayer time.
Hey, no problem.

[newzjunkey]

*This* cross has been there 52 years but *a* cross has been there since 1913. This concrete one replaced the old wooden cross which was knocked down in a windstorm.

[Chairman Fred]

Some years ago, the Ninth Circus ordered the cross removed, unless the land were sold to private owners. So the land was auctioned off, subject to the restriction that it would be maintained as a "War Memorial" The group that submitted the highest bid, as I recall, was the Ancient Order of Hibernians, aka Irish Catholics, who absolutely would have kept the cross.

A partisan Democrat group, excuse me, an atheist group, sued in the Ninth Circus, alleging that the sale was "unfair" in that the Ancient Order would have had fewer expenses. They were only going to maintain the cross; the atheists were going to demolish it and erect Something Else (no comment), and that would have cost more money. Again, their complaint was that the auction was "unfair". The Ninth Circus found in favor of the atheists.

Were I to comment I'd probably be arrested.

In case anyone neede further explication as to what has happened here.

[TChad]