Skip to comments.Ninth Circuit Decides: The Mt. Soledad Cross Will Come Down, "Memorial Would Be Desecrated"
Posted on 06/22/2006 1:44:05 PM PDT by RDTF
ANN ARBOR, MI A threejudge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to stay Federal District Judge Gordon Thompsons order to remove the Mt. Soledad Cross pending an appeal. Thus, the City of San Diego must remove the Cross by August 1, 2006, or face fines of $5,000 per day thereafter. In its decision, however, the Ninth Circuit scheduled oral arguments on the matter for the week of October 16, 2006, weeks after the Cross is to be removed. The 43- foot Cross was erected in 1954 and currently is the centerpiece of a national memorial honoring American veterans of all wars. The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has been fighting to save the Cross since 2004 when it received information that the private memorial association operating the memorial site and the City were about to agree to settle the case, which had been on going for 15 years, by removing the Cross.
(Excerpt) Read more at thomasmore.org ...
Where do we send donations to fund their $5,000 a day bill?
Take it to the Supremes. Better chance there than with the 9th Circus...
Put the judges under the cross as they drop it.
They should sell the mountain to a private organization.
Like a church.
And yet the crescent "memorial" commemorating the 9-11 attacks continues.
Why couldn't, years ago, they have given the plot of land to someone for a $1 per year on the condition that no improvements be made upon it?
How do judges levy taxes like this,
and how do they collect them?
The Nutty Ninth strikes again
That's the really sick thing about it: It IS private!
Will they beat it with their shoes?
The liberal 9th Circuit court strikes again!
Should I infer from this that that would be an en banc hearing? If so, shouldn't they have stayed the lower court's order until the entire 9th has ruled? I'm not understanding what's gone on here.
What's more unbelievable:
>> Despite the fact that the ballot proposal passed by an astonishing 76% of the vote, State Court Judge Patricia Cowett ruled that Proposition A violated the California constitution. Her order is being appealed as well. <<
A Constitutional amendment is unconstitutional because the proposed constitution is different from the original. Duh, that's why we are changing it. If, however, the propsed constitution were not so different, however, courts would, and have, strike down the amendment for having no effect.
Sounds like a win for the Godless.
I think a 3 judge panel ruled on it. I think the next step will be the entire 9th Circuit court
This case seems headed for The Roberts' Court.
It's the 9th Circus. Hopefully, the Supremes will slap them down pretty quickly.
Oh, I see, this is viewed as "Congress making a law, establishing a religion".
Just how stupid do you have to be to make that leap?
That cross wont come down. Believe me my Christian soldiers.
I was just thinking that...I'd be glad to contribute to a $5000/day bill to keep the cross there.
It's private land? I thought the city owned it.
The Ninth circuit should be drawn and quartered.
There should be thousand stading in line forming a no violent protest the day its scheduled to come down.
Effigies of the ACLU should be burned.
...and the libs can't figure out why they keep losing elections.
I believe that's been tried, and it's been blocked. I don't know the details, but there have been a number of attempts at a "workaround," but all have been blocked.
Someone really, really, wants that cross removed.
How much faith in them do you have that they'd rule to leave it be?
The people in this country are just going to have to start totally disobeying these stupid judges orders. Let em push the 5k a day and then try to collect!
I don't believe the judiciary was meant to be the end all for legislation. We are being ruled by the personal beliefs of judges. All rulings like this should be disobeyed.
The city tried to sell the land to a private group but the courts shot that downing saying that the sale demonstrated government preference for religion.
"reminds me of the taliban destroying the statues they didn't believe in.."
Could not have said it better.
In other news The City of San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obisbo, San Jose, Santa Monica, et al will soon be changing their names.
It'd really stick in their craw.
I am beginning to think liberals are vampires.
(Since they are repelled by the sign of the cross and all.)
Maybe we should start putting up mirrors and planting garlic to see if that works, too.
Or maybe ghouls, since they like dead, unbaptised, babies, too.
Well now they want to cannibalize those dead babies for "tissue". If is non-viable, then why are they trying to use it?
I seem to recall that 2/3 of the 9th Circus' rulings are overturned. Certainly hope this is one of them, and before they can actually force the cross down.
Hence the ghoul refernce.
(In myth, ghouls lived off the flesh of the dead, and particularlly preferred the flesh of unbaptised infants.)
Yep. Sucking the money right out of our wallets to fund their religion, I've been saying left-liberalism is a religion for years. The Cross is competition.
If a memorial cannot have a cross, then how can a national cemetary have any crosses?
And there are those who oppose the drunk driver crosses the dot the roads.
Could it be....
I thought ghouls dug up corpses.
"They should sell the mountain to a private organization."
They tried that and were stopped by the black robed tyrants of the anti-American left.
Good to hear that. I imagine the next step for these irreligist fascists would be to ban religious headstones in government-owned cemeteries: can't offend people with religious symbols, can we? Censor Arlington, censor Normandy, and censor the local cemeteries where your folks are buried. Mustn't make people feel bad.
All those crosses at Arlington Cemetery...
No, that is barbaric. They should be crucified on the cross. ;-)
Of course, I mean effigies of the Ninth court justices. This would be fitting.
"I am beginning to think liberals are vampires."
Not really they are the offspring of Hitler and Stalin.
For the same reason, robbers rob banks --- that's where the bodies are.
I believe the Supreme Court already (in 2003) denied review. As far as I know, all legal remedies have been exhausted, other than the Hail-Mary-pass "eminent domain" strategy the Thomas Moore people are suggesting here.
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.