[boop]

If that sign is there, why isn't it considered private property? If not, can we simply then claim it is "art"? Are they going to order its destruction? If so, will they use PUBLIC workers to tear it down?

BTW, I thought this was already settled as constitutional. Maybe I was thinking of that other Cross that was vandalized by the tolerant left.

[HiTech RedNeck]

So is this going to grind up to the USSC?

It stinks that some malcontents want the place to be bare. (What kind of monument would one erect to atheism. A giant vacuum bottle?)

If the cross has to move, it should be sold to some private party who will move it to another spot as “legally” close to its present site as practical.

[newzjunkey]

The cross and land had been left to the city. They didn’t put it up. When this went to the courts, the city auctioned it multiple times because the courts said it wasn’t enough. The voters voted, multiple times, to keep it where it is, how it is, even after a judge changed the majority requirement for passage. During the Bush years Congress voted to condemn the property and make it a national memorial site. The city is no longer involved, the area belongs to the Feds.