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

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: 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: 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 ]

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