Alabama Makes It Illegal to Remove Confederate Monuments

Breitbart ^ | 05/27/2017 | Ryan Saavedra

[Trump20162020]

The new law attempts to preserve history by making it illegal to remove monuments that have been in place for more than 40 years.

The Alabama Memorial Preservation Act of 2017, signed into law Wednesday by Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R), protects historical Confederate monuments which have come under fire in recent weeks by Democratic politicians.

The new legislation prohibits:

The relocation, removal, alteration, renaming, or other disturbance of any architecturally significant building, memorial building, memorial street, or monument located on public property which has been in place for 40 or more years.

[PROCON]

[Sacajaweau]

You want a 5 man council ordering SIGNIFICANT historical monuments out?? cuz they are perceived by some as offensive??

[Timpanagos1]

From conservatism, we understand that local control works better than dictates from Washington DC or a state capital.

We also understand that property is best managed by the entity that owns the property.

We have both of those elements in this Alabama case. Local control and the right of entities to control their property.

[Timpanagos1]

Who owns the monuments is the primary factor.

In New Orleans the city council decided to take down the Confederate monuments. That was well within thier powers. And a future city council will have the power to return the monuments.

I actually went to a rally at Lee Circle a couple weeks ago as I opposed the removal of the Lee statue.

My reason for opposing its removal may be different than others. I saw the Robert E. Lee statue and Lee Circle as a city landmark, both cultural, historical and geographic and a vital element of the city.

But it was not my statue, it belonged to the City of New Orleans.

[Yardstick]

Look I get the libertarian arguments. But you have to be smarter than that. We’re in a struggle with the left and you’re missing the forest for the trees. It’s not even worth arguing with idiots like you. I’m sure you’re very intelligent and stuff but you’re an idiot. Jim should just get rid of you.

[Timpanagos1]

A libertarian would argue that no government should spend money to er Ct or maintain a monument and monuments should be financed privately.

That’s not my view.

[Robwin]

As Pat Buchanan notes in his excellent piece at the beginning of this thread, What they blindly refuse to see is that while its sins are scarlet, as are those of all civilizations.

The advocates of removal see themselves as morally superior creatures, in fact almost without fault, compared to those with whom they disapprove. Such arrogance makes them very dangerous people.

[Timpanagos1]

Pat is not incorrect.

But he does not answer who gets to determine what monuments are owned by Mobile, Memphis or New Orleans.

Do those cities get to pick and chose, or does the state or national capitol decide?

[Karl Spooner]

If the monuments were purchased by a private group with the intent to display them on private property - would that be okay with you?

[Timpanagos1]

“If the monuments were purchased by a private group with the intent to display them on private property - would that be okay with you?”

It would all depend on the agreement or contract that was executed at the time the relationship between the property owner and the owner of the statue.

In the case of New Orleans, there is a plan to move the monuments that were removed to a museum setting.

[ohioman]

Do you agree with this Alabama law?

[ohioman]

You are 100%’correct concerning Tompamogos or whatever the hell his ridiculous name is. He needs the Zot from FR!

[Timpanagos1]

“Do you agree with this Alabama law?”

I am generally not in favor of laws that are symbolic, have no strong enforcement mechanism and will be subject to defeat when under judicial review.

In the case of the Alabama law, an entity would only be fined $25,000 if it were to, without a state committee’s approval, remove a Confederate monument.

A $25,000 fine is of little consequence for a city that wants to remove a Confederate monument.

In the end, the small fine will not keep cities from taking down Confederate monuments, but the small fine may keep the law from being challenged in the courts.

[Trump20162020]

For the record: Tennessee has a similar law, called the 'Tennessee Heritage Protection Act'.

It's the reason why the statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest still stands in Memphis today, despite the city council there voting to remove it in 2015 after the Charleston church shooting.

That Tennessee law hasn't been overturned by any court either, and Memphis has all but given up challenging it in court. They're now trying to find an end-run around the law with a waiver, but that's beside the main point: This law is constitutional.