Easy. The federal judiciary is preventing the state government from serving its citizens. Surely the definition of tyranny can cover that case.
I'm not sure what you mean by "(this is the BY WHAT LAW?).
I am keeping the focus on the real issue, which is by what law - not fabricated court doctrine - can the federal court order the removal of this monument?
If legistlators, executives, and judges act in good faith there should not be much effort at all [to remove all religious "taint" from every government expenditure].
Welcome to a world engineered by the ACLU. People can be taxed at 50% or more, this money turned over to any private charity as long as its members have no avowed faith. Real good result. (/sarcasm off)
From the very earliest Establishment cases that came before the Supreme Court they have followed a fairly consistent interpretation.
If that is true, then the only Establishment cases came after they radically changed the definition of "establishment". That does not change the actual and original meaning of the first amendment.
How are the citizens of Alabama who are not Christians or Jews served by a large religious monument in the middle of the state Judical Building? For that matter, how are Christians and Jews served? Is it one of the duties of government to remind us of the commands of God, as written in the book of Exodus, translated by King James's men, and edited by Roy Moore?
I am keeping the focus on the real issue, which is by what law - not fabricated court doctrine - can the federal court order the removal of this monument?
Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia
TITLE 42 , CHAPTER 21 , SUBCHAPTER I , Sec. 1983.