Posted on 08/15/2003 2:43:34 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:06:49 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore yesterday defied a court order to remove a large granite monument emblazoned with the Ten Commandments from a state judicial building on the grounds that God's law supercedes state and even federal law.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Here's the recap, for which there are scores of links, if you want.
Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court was elected as "the 10 Commandments Judge", based on some litigation he got into in 1998 over posting the 10 Commandments in his courtroom. In the course of that litigation, Coral Ridge Ministries, a TV ministry affiliated with Paul and Jan Crouch (shes the one with the purple hair and big fake boobs) paid the excessive sum of $170,000 to his "defense fund". Coral Ridge Ministries is a 60 million dollar a year enterprise, of which 3.8 million is directly spent on fundraising, and which has an affiliated political arm. The pastor of that "ministry" has been deeply involved with fundraising with the Crouches, and is a devotee of "Christian astrology".
When this stone idol to the 10 Commandments was installed in 2001, it was done under cover of night, with no consultation with or consent of the other justices of the state supreme court, but it was paid for and filmed by Coral Ridge Ministries, and used for extensive fundraising. Since then, Moore has been making statements which show his intent to put that monument up to the exclusion of other faiths, and to show some theocratic basis to American government. He has defied the court orders to take them down, meanwhile, Coral Ridge has paid over the sum of $375,000.00 for his overly excessive "defense fund"; some FReepers call for him to be President, and many have had harsh words about the conservative Reagan appointee that wrote the appellate opinion.
At this point, a large rally is being gathered and Coral Ridge continues to benefit from donations - the language used to rally people in favor of Roy Moore's stone idol is inflammatory, and may spur some to violent acts. At least one fellow justice of the Alabama Supreme Court has publicly disavowed this, more will be following, and the Alabama AG has said Alabama will do everything it can to come into compliance with the injunction. As of yesterday, Moore claimed that the state of Alabama has spent $125,000,000.00 defending the placement of this monument, at the rate of $25,000.00 per day.
$125 million on this one issue? I find that hard to believe. Do you have an unbaised source?
After reading this, I put out a call to Moore supporters on the other threads to tell me whether he had really said this or not. I then tried to find a transcript of his statement. I still haven't found a transcript, but msnbc has video. Moore said it. The only separate figure he tossed out (at least that I could hear over the msnbc newsbabe) was that $62.5 million in taxpayer dollars had been spent on "experts and consultants" in defending the monument. He also said the STATE is spending $25,000 PER DAY on this fight - despite the fact that Coral Ridge Ministries has already raised $375,000 for his legal fees.
I freely acknowledge my disagreement with Moore on this issue, but to date my disagreement has been on Constitutional grounds. Now I'm seriously starting to wonder what else is going on here. And I'm dying to know who these "experts" who scammed the Alabama taxpayers out of more than $60M are. As for who agreed to pay them that much, we already know the answer to that.
Where does the GOP stand on this and where do the socialist godless evil perverted Democrat SOB's running for President stand on this?.
The RNC ought to make the difference clear.
Seems to me that depictions of the Ten Commandments are posted at the US Supreme Court Building.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest court in our land, has a unique association with the Ten Commandments. Depictions of the Commandments appear in marble behind the justices at the High Court. In addition, friezes at the pinnacle of the U.S. Supreme Court building maintain the biblical figures of Moses (holding tablets representing the Ten Commandments) and Solomon. Plus, oak doors separating the courtroom from the central hallway of the Supreme Court building maintain a representation of tablets bearing the Roman numerals one through ten; although the Commandments are not written out. It is readily apparent that the U.S. Supreme Court bears obvious reverence for the Ten Commandments' impact on American law and justice.-Falwell
BUZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!! WRONG ANSWER!
Please read the opinion in this case before you make these statements. What you claim is not true. This case is unique to Judge Moore and his monument, for reasons that originate in Moore's own statements. Neither THIS court NOR ANY OTHER FEDERAL COURT is pushing a blanket prohibition on the display of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. This is a lie that Moore's people want you to believe. Learn the facts. The very same appeals court that ruled against Moore upheld the display of the Ten Commandments in a Georgia court just two weeks before this decision. Both the District Court and the Court of Appeals stated explicitly that the display of the Ten Commandments if fine, as long as the state entity displaying it isn't doing it for an unconstitutional purpose. Read Moore's own words about why he is displaying it. Then read his own words about how, in his view, the freedom of religion under the 1st Amendment applies only to Christians.
This is not about the Ten Commandments. It is about Judge Roy Moore and his own ego and ambition.
"But, in announcing this holding today, the court believes it is important to clarify at the outset that the court does not hold that it is improper in all instances to display the Ten Commandments in government buildings; nor does the court hold that the Ten Commandments are not important, if not one of the most important, sources of American law. Rather the court's limited holding, as will be explained below in more detail, is that the Chief Justice's actions and intentions in this case crossed the Establishment Clause line between the permissible and the impermissible."
They are the ones that don't want them there, for whatever purpose.
Its not about the Judge, whether you like him or not.
Its bigger than that now.
Sounds like a bunch of oxyMORONS to me.
$125,000,000 in taxpayer dollars to defend this monument. Who got it, and for what?
Because they are going to have to remove this monument by force, and its not about who put it up or why, although the geniuses on these lower courts would have you believe so.
Nobody cares who or why they put it up, only that the godless Democrats want to take it down.
What the hell is the difference who or why or how they put it up?
Either you can display the Ten Commandments, or you can't.
If they put it up for the express purpose of declaring the State's preference for and adherence to Christianity over any other faith, then there is that small matter of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment.
$125,000,000, to date. Who got it, and for what?
If you are calling Judge Carnes of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, who wrote the opinion, a "godless Democrat," then you need to check your facts and then post your apology to him.
By Todd Kleffman
Montgomery Advertiser
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore announced Thursday that he will defy a federal court order to remove his Ten Commandments monument, but may have unleashed a backlash from his fellow justices.
"As chief justice of the state of Alabama, it is my duty to administer the justice system of our state, not destroy it," Moore told a large crowd of reporters and onlookers gathered in the rotunda of the state Judicial Building, near the monument.
 |
| Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore defends his Ten Commandments monument Thursday in Montgomery. |
|
-- David Bundy, Advertiser
|
 |
"I have no intention of removing the monument. ...To do so would, in effect, result in the disestablishment of our system of justice in this state. This I cannot and will not do."
Alabama Supreme Court Associate Justice J. Gorman Houston Jr. issued a statement that the Supreme Court's other members were meeting to discuss Moore's actions and would "take whatever steps necessary...to assure that the state of Alabama is a government of laws and not men."
A majority of the eight remaining justices has the power to overrule Moore's decision to keep the monument in place. They took no action Thursday.
Montgomery attorney Steve Glassroth, one of the plaintiffs in the Ten Commandments case, quickly filed a complaint against Moore with the Judicial Inquiry Commission. Glassroth alleged Moore violated judicial ethics by announcing he intended to defy an order from a higher court.
If the commission determines the complaint has reasonable cause, it would be forwarded to the Court of the Judiciary, which hears matters involving judges, and Moore would be relieved of his duties while the case is pending.
Attorney General Bill Pryor, who has long supported Moore and his cause, indicated after Moore's announcement that he could not back Moore's defiance of the federal courts.
"As attorney general, I have a duty to obey all orders of courts even when I disagree with those orders," Pryor said.
Moore said during his news conference that he will file a Writ of Prohibition and Mandamus with the U.S. Supreme Court today asking that it stay the order to remove the monument.
But attorney Richard Cohen of the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of the organizations suing Moore over the monument, said Moore's hope for intervention from the high court has little chance for success.
Moore's comments drew loud cheers from several in the audience of about 150 people.
"We put him in office by an overwhelming majority and we're standing by him," said Leigh Wiatt of Montgomery.
Others, however, said Moore's actions send a dangerous message.
"It's a sad day for the state of Alabama when the chief justice says he will violate or defy a court order," Glassroth said.
In his statement, Houston said the justices would do whatever they could to make sure the state does not have to pay fines and continues to follow U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Houston quoted from a Supreme Court opinion in the case of United States v. Lee:
"No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All of the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and bound to obey it," Houston said.
The Rev. Rick Scarborough likened Houston to Judas.
"I wonder if Houston kissed him on the way out the door," Scarborough said.
The CEO of Citibank doesn't have an office like these leeches do.
Rather than governing as social conservatives, they need to worry about the day to day sewers, cops, fire and roads stuff.
Judge Moore could have saved his monument simply by allowing other displays of other "sources of law". He could have saved his monument by not declaring, on behalf of the State, that the purpose of the monument was to demonstrate the State's adherence to his God.
Could someone else put it up? If they did so simply as a testament to the undisputed historical role of the Commandments in American law, and did not exclude other similar artifacts, they certainly could. That's not my opinion. That's the law. If they didn't hold that the monument was a symbol that the 1st Amendment is limited to Christianity, certainly they could. You seem to forget that Moore, in making his declarations, is speaking for the STATE.
By Jannell McGrew Reaction in the religious community to Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's refusal to move his Ten Commandments monument ran the gamut shortly after the controversial judicial figure made his announcement early Thursday afternoon. Standing near the two-ton granite tribute that has drawn international attention, Moore firmly asserted his belief that the monument should remain where it is. "I intend to uphold my oath to the Constitution of the United States as well as to the Constitution of the state of Alabama," Moore said during a news conference at the Judicial Building. "... I have maintained the rule of law. I have been true to the oath of my office. I can do no more, and I will do no less. So help me God." Ear-popping cheers and thunderous applause could be heard throughout the building upon Moore's appearance and after his speech. His supporters whistled, shook each other's hands and lauded Moore for his decision. "I don't think anyone was surprised," said the Rev. Laurence White, pastor of Our Savior Lutheran Church in Houston and co-chairman of Vision America, a group that has organized a rally in defense of Moore on Saturday. "Judge Moore has demonstrated from the beginning that he is a man of unshakable principles. I don't think he's come this far to abandon those principles now." But reaction throughout the city's religious community did not reflect solidarity. "I am ashamed that the chief justice of the Supreme Court of this state, who should be an exemplar in following the law, is defying the law," said Rabbi Kenneth Segel, leader of Temple Beth Or, a Jewish house of worship in Montgomery. The Rev. Michael Thurman, pastor of Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church, also expressed disapproval. "It's more important for me that people should try to live according to the precepts and principles of the Ten Commandments, rather than have a public display," Thurman said. "I'd much rather see it lived out than to see the big fight and hoopla over a monument." Moore said he had "no intention of removing" the monument and plans to take his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Segel said Moore has gone beyond the bounds of his judicial role. "What kind of example is that for our children?" Segel said. "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I noticed it always coincides with their own desires." Residents like Barbara Baxter said the Ten Commandments monument showdown is not an issue worth fighting over, not to mention potentially spending millions of taxpayers' dollars in a legal battle to defend it. "He needs to go on and remove it," Baxter said. "Whether you leave it in or take it out, it will still be in your heart." Montgomery resident Tricia Grier said she was happy to hear that Moore would not remove the monument. "Oh, praise God," she said immediately after she heard the news of Moore's decision. "I think that he knows that his God is more powerful than anything," Grier said. "He has a strong enough faith that he is not afraid of the persecution that will come along with his decision. That just tells me that he knows that God is going to be with him. I stand behind him 100 percent." Thompson's order gives the chief justice until Wednesday before imposing heavy fines on the state.
Montgomery Advertiser
"Austere" is a good word for it.
They've probably taken to drinking heavily and looking for other states to move to.
There is a nice brand new one there, for some reason, with chambers like you wouldn't believe.
That makes him infallible?
The concept that the motive is what determines whether or not a monument of the Ten Commandments can be displayed only makes sense to lawyers, and you know what Americans think of them.
They are myopic, but I don't know the layout of that courthouse.
Maybe you only get to see what they want you to see.
If you can't see that, you won't see any problem with Moore in this case. Is is okay that he has spent $125,000,000 in taxpayer dollars on this case? Who got it, and for what?
|
The Ten Commandments Monument Opinion: PDF, Word, WordPerfect |
Final Judgment and Injunction: PDF, Word, WordPerfectFinal Judgment Glassroth vs Moore, August 5, 2003: PDF, Word, WordPerfect |
Even Judge Roy Moore concedes that the 1st Amendment applies to state officials.
Have you read any of Lugsouls posts? He (or she) has explained the law so simply and accurately that even the most blinded members of the American Taliban ought to be able to understand it.
$125,000,000 in taxpayer dollars to defend this monument. Who got it, and for what? Over and over and over........ Maybe if you shout it enough, I will believe it, too.
Posters on these threads put in their two cents on the issue and move to other topics too.
But you have continued hammering against the Ten Commandments presence over and over and over, to the point it aroused my curiousity. Why are you so inflamed about this issue?
I notice from your profile the only reference whatsoever is a quote from Bertrand Russell, a man obsessed with hatred of God and a seminal thinker on communism. And you keep repeating the same stuff. So I just ask, What are you really against?
If you figure approximately 200 working days per year X 2 years; after factoring weekends, holidays and vacation, it comes out to about $3,000 per day. This figure must be bogus.
The judges on the 11th circuit court of appeals are conservative. Where did you get the idea they're liberal? Because they ruled against Moore?
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.