Roadside crosses for fallen Utah police unconstitutional, court rules

Daily Caller ^ | 08/19/10 | Warren Richey

[Logic n' Reason]

One assumes this has to do with separation of church and state?

If so....simply move the crosses back until they are no longer on "gummint" owned right of way.

Of course, one would have to convince the owner of the private property to allow the crosses to be placed there.

What would one then do with a muslim land owner??

[Chickensoup]

Interesting, in Europe and Asia the same leftists go gaga over roadside shrines as blahblah...cultural landmarks.

[rickb308]

I put those crosses up. Me. A private citizen. The court just cr*pped on my Freedom of Speach! Oppression under the Color of Law! Put THAT it your crack pipe & huff it 10th Circus Court.
Yeah, I’m lying. PROTECTED speech!

[Monorprise]

Were I in Utah politics I’d go ahead with the eminent domain threat, it was not your former governor that made it but rather Your state Legislator which passed a law authorizing the governor to carry out such actions against Federal land.

An article on the matter. As a Utahan I’d focus on supporting and encouraging them efforts. Perhaps to start a controversy to make the case to the rest of the U.S. about the serous issues of Federal land Thief.

As for selling the land to foreign governments I don’t see that as being a problem as the minute the land is out of Federal control they lose the ability to uses the supremacy clause to assert unlimited authority over the land.

We shouldn’t care who has titled to the land as long as its not the Federal Government. Simply because anyone and everyone else would be unquestionably under the authority and jurisdiction of the state.

Technically the Federal Government’s land within the bounties of the State is suppose to be under the same Jurisdiction. But you know the same old corrupt truth about the Federal governments “judgment” about the extent of their own powers.