Skip to comments.San Diego judge orders: Take down that cross! (American Communist-Liberal Union Strikes Again!!!)
Posted on 05/03/2006 4:09:29 PM PDT by Conservative Coulter Fan
Mt. Soledad cross and veterans memorial above San Diego (soledadmemorial.com)
Ruling on a 15-year-old ACLU case, a federal judge today ordered the city of San Diego to remove a mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.
U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson said, "It is now time, and perhaps long overdue, for this court to enforce its initial permanent injunction forbidding the presence of the Mount Soledad cross on city property," the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
Thompson ruled in 1991 the Mount Soledad cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state" but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy for more than a decade.
ACLU lawyer James McElroy believes San Diego officials finally will give up their fight.
"I don't think the city has its heart in taking more action," he said, according to the paper.
A city lawyer argued during the hour-long court hearing today that citizens had voted for transfer of the land under the cross.
Proposition A, passed by 75 percent in July, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of a veterans memorial.
The ballot initiative came about after the city refused to donate the cross and memorial to the federal government. A group called San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial took just 23 days to gather 105,000 signatures.
In a ruling now on appeal, however, a Superior Court judge found the transfer unconstitutional.
The Union-Tribune said the group behind the public vote on transfer likely will appeal Thompson's decision.
The 29-foot cross has stood on Mount Soledad as the center of a war memorial on city land since 1954. The first cross on the site was built in 1913.
A bill authorizing the federal government to take over the memorial was authored by Republican U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter and Randy Cunningham. President Bush signed the bill into law in December.
Responding to today's ruling, Mayor Jerry Sanders said he would recommend the city council and city attorney take action to save the cross.
The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. In 1998, the city sold the property to the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Association, which again was challenged in court. The sale originally was upheld but later ruled unconstitutional by the full panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and remanded back to district court to work out a remedy.
During its brief period of ownership, the Memorial Association made significant improvements, including extensive landscaping and the addition of more than 3,000 plaques honoring military veterans.
What happens if the city refuses to take down the cross, or pay the fine?
Why doesn't the city just sell the land to a Catholic church for $1.00 and issue the required permits for allowing the cross.
Sell the property to a non-profit, private group who then maintains the cross in perpetuity.
I like that idea.
these people are despicable
Too bad we can't put the judge up on that cross...
What about all the crosses in the national cemeteries. Isn't that a violation of church and state? Another anti-Christ religious bigot in a robe.
First four posts are top drawer in my book!Maybe the VFW or the American Legion could take it over. Now, where is that checkbook...
Or suppose crowds of people try to block dudes in dozers driving up that mountain. The politically correct crowd hyperventilated about that Rachel Corrie girl who went to the palestinian territories and got run over by a bulldozer. So I expect the politically correct crowd would be against any physical action to remove protesters here if that happens.
I just called the mayor's office. They said they tried something like that before but it didn't work. They aren't through trying and really appreciated the call.
There have been other attempts to sell or transfer the land to other organizations that are not public organizations . The courts have struck down those transfers in the past. That's why we are at this stalemate at the 11th hour today.
let the illegals make human barricades to block its removal
Rachel Corrie had it coming...and I don't have any pity for her...hopefully she'll be forgotten.
They tried it before.
Shhhhh that will come next
You'd think that the commonsense solution would be the transfer of land ownership. However, the sale was ruled "unconstitutional...". Can any of our expert FReepers tell us why that sale would have been unconstitutional?
Well in that case, why don't we track down the atheist a-hole who filed the lawsuit and use the cross to crucify him.
On what grounds!?
This is another case of "I'm offended - take it away before I get offended again!" No matter how it is pointed out that the US Constitution prohibits government support of any particular religious operation or effort, the ACLU and the Social Liberals trot out Jefferson's letter as proof of total church-state separation.
A letter, not a law or amendment that was voted upon, and yet this is their PROOF! We have had nothing like this attack until the Earl Warrne court and the conversion of the judiciary into a law-making body that John Marshall wouldn't recognize in his worst nightmare. A pox on the 9th Circuit and may all who deserve it get the gout! Bah!
I'm waiting for the ACLU et al to bring suit to turn all crossroads into traffic circles ... you know how insidious religious symbolism is and with so many people flying these days ... Remember it is generally the government that builds and maintains these religious symbols - Oh BARF!
Well San Diego can take down the cross, put up a flag pole, and raise the Mexican flag. That should satisfy the judge and many politicians at the same time.
ACLU=American Communist "Liberation" (Enslavement) Unit
Perhaps someone can create a nest for a spotted owl in the cross so federal law would prevent its removal.
I suspect that the city government would like to give in and agree with the ACLU and the liberal judge.
I suspect that is the reason why the citizens had to use a ballot issue to keep the city government from caving in and removing it.
I suspect that if the city simply refuses to obey the courts, the State would cut off any State funds they might receive. The Federal government might do the same eventually, but that would likely take another decade or two to work it's way through the courts.
Time to split up the 9th Circus!!!
I never understood this. How can a uncoerced transfer of one's own (the city's) property be considered unconstitutional? Idiocy.
Once again the will of the people is negated by a single judge, a referendum was passed, the citizens (including me) signed the petition's and one person sez you live in my world, what happened to majority rule ??? Call every talk show in the land this cannot happen.
We've already had a "judge" on a cross. No other sacrifices are needed. Judge Thompson needs to be at the foot of this cross on his knees, if we wants to escape judgement.
Who gets the money from the fine ?
Who is the judge going to send to enforce it? Judges don't have armies.
I thought it was cute, LOL.
This "judge" needs to be impeached. This is insane.
What we need is a whole bunch of civil disobedience. Cities just plain refusing to cooperate. What's the ACLU going to do? I suppose US marshals or something will come and remove the cross.
I'm really disgusted. FUBAR.
It is almost time to fight.
Essentially... the court found it wasn't an arms-length sale, but was rigged to keep the atheist from buying the cross.
The City of San Diego should remove the cross, and then drive it through the heart of the ACLU's attorney.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.