SUPREME COURT ISSUES STAY IN SAN DIEGO CROSS CASE - High court intervenes in fight over cross

AP ^ | 7/3/06 | TONI LOCY

[Pukin Dog]

I dont doubt it. Who cares? We are going to win!

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

American Legion in CA says “Enough,” Brings ADF Aboard To Defend Mt. Soledad Cross Against ACLU

[60Gunner]

Kennedy is not SCOTUS. He is but one member. And considering the victories we had last summer vis a vis Roberts and Alito, he does not have as powerful an influence as he used to have.

[firewalk]

good news

[Mr. Brightside]

Keep the courts in mind when people say that Bush didn't/doesn't make a difference.

[Digger]

Next Supreme Court Judge: Janice Rogers Brown!!!

Fine by me but I'll guarantee you that it won't happen.

[Viet Vet in Augusta GA]

Doesn't mean much; this just preserves the "status quo" until the next action by the Supremes. SC is out of session for the summer, but even then individual justices take action on things like this routinely. You cannot read this action as either pro or con on the merits of the case. Still, I hope the cross wins!

[DoughtyOne]

That's about it.

[50sDad]

"A [Leftist California] judge [with an angenda more important than established case law] declared it was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion."

[fish hawk]

We want that in writing and what would be the penalty if you are wrong? (smile)

[50sDad]

The bottom line, IIR, was that the cross would have to be removed and/or torn down before the Supremes met again for business, a calculated move by the judge who ordered the destruction of the cross. This preserves things until the case can be argued, and indicates that the New Imroved USSC thinks that this should be discussed.

[Mr. Brightside]

Does this mean that the judges count noses on the possible outcome before the elect to hear one of these cases?

If so, then Kennedy is saying that the addition of either Alito or Roberts (or both) NOW makes this worth hearing.

I think that it takes four justices to vote to hear a case. The addition of Alito might have given the Court the 4th vote.

[Suzy Quzy]

Is Philip Paulson any relation to the new Fed Chairman Paulson?

[tflabo]

"ok, this is just a stay until they decide, nothing more. They do this kind of stuff all the time and it means nothing."

Be viligant there Halls....the tides a gonna change as we true patriots keep up the pressure and not only reclaim the Supreme Court but rise up with a renewed enthusiasm to promote conservatism widely. The traitorous left needs to be crushed and lets all do it together...with God we cannot fail my brethren and sistaren too.

[Pukin Dog]

I dont know.

[xzins]

I think you're right....I think I remember that.

So, then, it would probably be the loss of O'Connor that's going to get this heard.

[Pukin Dog]

Local news starting now in San Diego. Comments should be interesting to say the least. They are leading with the Cross story.

[hsalaw]

That was EXACTLY my reaction! Now we'll just have to see if the Supreme Court deserves any praise.

[ansel12]

Until someone else explains the details to us I'll tell you what I think this means.

There is some legislation being pushed to save the cross, but even with lightning speed by (congressional and senate standards) nothing could have been done by Aug 2, that is when the $5,000.00 A DAY fine kicks in, and the principals had said they couldn't hold on with a fine that size, so the cause appeared doomed, a stay gives us time.

I hope this is at least close to what is going on, losing the cross is so troubling to me, I haven't been following the case closely.

[attiladhun2]

I thot only Communist or Islamic regimes tore down the religious symbols of other faiths?