Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court: Mojave cross can stay.
PMSMBC ^ | 28 Apr 2010 | The Associated Press

Posted on 04/28/2010 7:39:27 AM PDT by US Navy Vet

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has said a federal court went too far in ordering the removal of a congressionally endorsed war memorial cross from its longtime home in California.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: supremecourt; thank; usconstitution; ussc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
NO other Web News outlet has this YET!
1 posted on 04/28/2010 7:39:27 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

It was on CNN radio news at the bottom of the hour.........


2 posted on 04/28/2010 7:40:31 AM PDT by Red Badger (Education makes people easy to lead, difficult to drive; easy to govern, but impossible to enslave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Fox just reported on it this morning.


3 posted on 04/28/2010 7:40:55 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

“In God We Trust’

NOT In Marx We Trust

NOT In Alinsky We Trust

NOT In Obama We Trust


4 posted on 04/28/2010 7:41:27 AM PDT by FormerACLUmember ("Subtlety is not going to win this fight": NJ Governor Chris Christie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
Hooray!

Lamh Foistenach Abu!
5 posted on 04/28/2010 7:42:08 AM PDT by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3/5 Marines, RVN '69 - St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Excellent news!


6 posted on 04/28/2010 7:42:32 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

5-4?


7 posted on 04/28/2010 7:42:37 AM PDT by Sybeck1 (Pander to me for a change!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Outstanding!


8 posted on 04/28/2010 7:42:43 AM PDT by ScottinVA (RIP to the country I love...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Anybody know what the vote was?


9 posted on 04/28/2010 7:43:04 AM PDT by Tribune7 (It is immoral to claim the tea parties to be racist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

If it really was 5-4 that would be despicable, but it would mean I sure can’t regret my votes for Dubya.


10 posted on 04/28/2010 7:44:39 AM PDT by Tribune7 (It is immoral to claim the tea parties to be racist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
a federal court went too far
Surely, they're not talking about the 9th Circus, are they?
11 posted on 04/28/2010 7:45:21 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

According to USA Today, the vote was 5-4.


12 posted on 04/28/2010 7:45:44 AM PDT by 50mm (Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power - Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

There’s our ‘bread crumb’ for the month.


13 posted on 04/28/2010 7:46:19 AM PDT by Outlaw Woman (Control the American people? Herding cats would be easier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Awesome news.

Bravo to the Court!

14 posted on 04/28/2010 7:47:10 AM PDT by NoRedTape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-472.pdf


15 posted on 04/28/2010 7:49:07 AM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Nice! I think BO’s stunt in embarassing the Supremes early this year is going to cost him many setbacks.

Increasingly, the BO news resembles those stories “5 year old takes family car before hitting wall . . . “


16 posted on 04/28/2010 7:49:35 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (Is it sedition to defy usurpation?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Washington Post has it now on front page. Was a 5-4 decision. Opinion by Justice Kennedy. Sonia Sotomayor voted AGAINST allowing the cross to stay. Unbelievable.


17 posted on 04/28/2010 7:49:47 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers (U.S. Out of My Doctor's Office!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
It wasn't even 5-4... It was 2-1-2-4.

KENNEDY, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered anopinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., joined, and in which ALITO, J., joined in part. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a concurring opinion. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

18 posted on 04/28/2010 7:50:13 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

It really was 5-4. The “conservatives” with Kennedy.

This is one of the instances when I can say wholeheartedly, “Thank God for George W. Bush.”


19 posted on 04/28/2010 7:51:56 AM PDT by USArmySpouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NoRedTape

This is what we have become. Cheering a mighty 5-4 victory.
The message is that but for one vote on the Supreme Court we would go the way of Britain and France - a non Christian nation.
I realize that the Christian must be in the heart but truthfully when it disappears into the dark, it dies.


20 posted on 04/28/2010 7:52:48 AM PDT by Hans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers

We know who are friends are.
This is a huge WIN.


21 posted on 04/28/2010 7:52:49 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Impeachment !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: All

Hoping for some legal expert to relieve me of my fear (based on a brief skim of the decision) that there might be less here than meets the eye.


22 posted on 04/28/2010 7:53:41 AM PDT by sand lake bar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw Woman

YOU are cynical! What ever happened to the “Show Me” spirit of MO?


23 posted on 04/28/2010 7:54:02 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

“I sure can’t regret my votes for Dubya.”

I know I sure don’t.

We are holding the line here by a very slim one point.


24 posted on 04/28/2010 7:54:45 AM PDT by Persevero (If man evolved from monkeys and apes, why do we still have monkeys and apes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Thank God for the supreme court to right that wrong. It is such a shame what they had done to this country. Visited that cross before and it is such a beautiful place with the cross as lighting beam for many to see while driving up.


25 posted on 04/28/2010 7:56:03 AM PDT by Tamatoa (Fight for our America, Fight for our Country I fought to defend!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Does this mean this farce is finally over?


26 posted on 04/28/2010 7:57:46 AM PDT by My hearts in London - Everett (So the writer who breeds more words than he needs, is making a chore for the reader who reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My hearts in London - Everett

Seems like it’s going back to lower court. Not over.


27 posted on 04/28/2010 7:58:57 AM PDT by sand lake bar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sand lake bar

I haven’t looked at the actual decision, but it looks like the holding is that the government can make the area where the cross is private property within the national park. That was their plan to avoid Constitutional problems, but the lower court stopped them from doing so.


28 posted on 04/28/2010 7:59:00 AM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998
Stevens, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Breyer. What human stew have we here?
29 posted on 04/28/2010 7:59:05 AM PDT by Hans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

But going back to lower court so that they might reconsider their decision based on SC’s ruling.


30 posted on 04/28/2010 8:00:07 AM PDT by sand lake bar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

and it was a 5-4 ruling... why am i not surprised?


31 posted on 04/28/2010 8:01:02 AM PDT by latina4dubya ( self-proclaimed tequila snob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet; pissant

Great!

Another victory for a long battle fought by Duncan Hunter.

[6.7] Duncan Hunter, the California Republican who sponsored legislation transferring control of the Mount Soledad Memorial to the federal government. [6.8]http://www.cpedia.com/wiki?q=Mount+Soledad&guess_ambig=Jolla+Playhouse+Mount+Soledad+Birch+Aquarium+San+Diego+Museum+

I see the vote was 5 to 4...the usual holdouts, including Sotomayor???


32 posted on 04/28/2010 8:02:43 AM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more ‘share the wealth’ socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

ABC radio news reporting that the USSC ruled that the cross can stay on public land.

AAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

It’s not on public land, it’s been transferred to private land.


33 posted on 04/28/2010 8:02:58 AM PDT by Carley (I'll keep clinging to the constitution, my guns and my religion, thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya

It appears that 4 members of the court may not be American.


34 posted on 04/28/2010 8:03:19 AM PDT by screaminsunshine (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sand lake bar

THE CROSS CAN STAY

Revel in that!


35 posted on 04/28/2010 8:04:24 AM PDT by Carley (I'll keep clinging to the constitution, my guns and my religion, thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

Amen to your post! (love your tagline, too!)


36 posted on 04/28/2010 8:05:23 AM PDT by newfreep (Palin/DeMint 2012 - Bolton: Secy of State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Thank God!


37 posted on 04/28/2010 8:08:57 AM PDT by FES0844
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

But will Obama go through with the sale?
That’s the problem with these things dragging on for years.

Cross = Bamiyan Buddhas?
Obama = Taliban?


38 posted on 04/28/2010 8:09:42 AM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (NEW TAG ====> **REPEAL OR REBEL!** -- Islam Delenda Est! -- Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Carley

Hopin’ and prayin’ you’re right and that this is the end of it!


39 posted on 04/28/2010 8:09:46 AM PDT by sand lake bar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; jazusamo; Girlene; 4woodenboats; Grimmy; xzins; smoothsailing; lilycicero; bigheadfred; ..

(( ping ))


40 posted on 04/28/2010 8:12:10 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

A net news church turns up very little copy on the story.

Anyone have a link to a detailed story about the cross?


41 posted on 04/28/2010 8:12:44 AM PDT by gunsequalfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
The ruling was 5-4, with the court's conservatives in the majority.

This nation remains just one vote away from total sloth and chaos.

42 posted on 04/28/2010 8:15:37 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
“It is a sad day for our country when the moral foundation
of our law and the acknowledgment of God has to be hidden
from public view to appease a federal judge.”

I am glad they over turned the earlier appeasement!

Quote is not mine, I forgot who wrote it.

43 posted on 04/28/2010 8:15:39 AM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran ((B.?) Hussein (Obama?Soetoro?Dunham?) Change America Will Die From.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
I just saw it scrawled across the bottom of the TV screen....
44 posted on 04/28/2010 8:20:50 AM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran; Lancey Howard
Judge Roy Moore

Sad Day

I think we are already there Lancey. Looking for something that has already found us.

45 posted on 04/28/2010 8:24:24 AM PDT by bigheadfred (If I've said it once, I've said it a million times...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sand lake bar
"Hoping for some legal expert to relieve me of my fear (based on a brief skim of the decision) that there might be less here than meets the eye."

I just flipped through. What caught my eye immediately, is that Steven's dissent is longer than the majority and concurring opinions, combined. Thankfully, Steven's is retiring. What a disaster he has been, especially considering he was a Republican pick.

46 posted on 04/28/2010 8:25:49 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; US Navy Vet

Very good news but sad that it was an issue in the first place and sadder still it wasn’t a unanimous decision by SCOTUS.


47 posted on 04/28/2010 8:28:56 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: sand lake bar
"Hoping for some legal expert to relieve me of my fear (based on a brief skim of the decision) that there might be less here than meets the eye."

There is. After quickly skimming the decision, it has MUCH less to do with the merits of Buono's case, than it does technical aspects of how the trial court applied the law. Scalia goes further to assert that the the lower court's decision went beyond the initial injunction, and that as a matter of law, violated the principle of standing.

Alito has given direction to the lower court, and has remanded the case back to the trial court for further proceeding.

While I'm not a mind-reader, I believe that eventually this case will be decided on the merits, and we'll see a similar decision - assuming of course the balance of the court remains unchanged by the time it makes a second appearance.

48 posted on 04/28/2010 8:40:45 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet
The SCOTUS did NOT rule that the "cross can stay." In a plurality decision, the Court remanded the case back to the District Court for further factual development consistent with the SCOTUS's opinion. The SCOTUS, however, did not rule that the cross can stay, and the District may very well direct the removal of the cross, subject to further appellate review.
49 posted on 04/28/2010 8:41:37 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Fox had it on the morning program.


50 posted on 04/28/2010 8:43:08 AM PDT by Salvation ( "With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson