So it will be a statue of the qu’uran?
The highest office of law in this nation, the Supreme Court, already has that covered, nearly a century ago:
Courtroom friezes: The South Wall Frieze includes figures of lawgivers from the ancient world and includes Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius, and Augustus. The North Wall Frieze shows lawgivers from the Middle Ages on and includes representations of Justinian, Muhammad, Charlemagne, John of England, Louis IX of France, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall, and Napoleon. The Moses frieze depicts him holding the Ten Commandments, although only commandments six through ten, usually considered the more secular commands, are visible. Further, Moses' beard obscures some of the words so that instead of reading "Thou Shalt Not Steal", it says "Steal", and similarly appears to command viewers to kill and commit adultery.
In 1997, the Council on American-Islamic Relations asked for the image of Muhammad to be removed from the marble frieze of the façade. While appreciating the fact that Muhammad was included in the court's pantheon of 18 prominent lawgivers of history, CAIR noted that Islam discourages depictions of Muhammad in any artistic representation. CAIR also objected that the prophet was shown with a sword, reinforcing long-held stereotypes of Muslims as intolerant conquerors. Chief Justice William Rehnquist rejected the request to sandblast Muhammad, saying the artwork "was intended only to recognize him, among many other lawgivers, as an important figure in the history of law; it is not intended as a form of idol worship". The court later added a footnote to tourist materials, calling it a "a well-intentioned attempt by the sculptor to honor Muhammad".
No, but what if the Muslims demand space for a monument as well? Can the legislature turn them down without leaving the 10 Commandment monument open for challenge?