Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member CCUSA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    7,675

    'Opponents can't remove cross by suing San Diego'

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=53784 -


    LAW OF THE LAND
    'Opponents can't remove cross by suing San Diego'
    Ruling concludes monument's ownership change eliminates city as defendant

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Posted: January 16, 2007
    1:00 a.m. Eastern



    © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com



    Mt. Soledad cross near San Diego
    Lawyers for an atheist who wanted a cross removed from the Mt. Soledad Memorial in San Diego can't reach their goal by suing the city, since the federal government now owns the land, according to an appeals court ruling.

    "We argued from the start that there was no reason for this case to proceed since the federal government lawfully took ownership of the land on which the memorial sits," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice.

    His comments came with the announcement that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had issue a new order dismissing a lawsuit against San Diego as moot.

    (Story continues below)


    "The appeals court dismissed the suit agreeing with the argument that the case is moot because the federal government now owns the land on which the memorial sits," the announcement said.

    The ACLJ, which had filed an amicus brief on behalf of 22 members of Congress with the appeals court, said the court's opinion "brings to an end one legal chapter" in the fight over the cross, which has been in the courts since the late 1980s.

    The ACLJ had argued that since Congress, in a proposal sponsored by California Congressman Duncan Hunter, transferred control of the property to the federal government, and that plan was signed into law by President Bush in August, the city as a defendant was now out of the case.

    There are, however, other legal challenges that have been launched against the memorial's cross, including a federal lawsuit against the government challenging the constitutionality of the memorial. The ACLJ also has filed briefs in another challenge within the state court system in California, officials said.

    Just weeks earlier, another appellate level state court panel concluded that a voter measure that authorized transfer of the land to the federal government was proper.

    The decision from another panel of justices by a 3-0 ruling overturned a decision by Superior Court Judge Patricia Yim Cowett that invalidated the measure. The court also reversed a $275,000 attorney fee award received by an ACLU-backed lawyer for plaintiff Phillip Paulsen, an atheist who died in 2006.

    Charles LiMandri, the West Coast Regional Director for the Thomas More Law Center, said the conclusion protected the will of the people "and their desire to preserve a historical, veterans memorial for future generations."

    Paulsen filed the lawsuit in 1989 and a court told the city to take the cross down. But 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.

    Then Proposition A, passed by 75 percent in July 2005, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of the veterans memorial.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Related special offers:
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member IndianaJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,235
    Yeehaw! There's one for the gipper! And Duncan Hunter you did good!
    We are NOT a nation of immigrants!

  3. #3
    MW
    MW is offline
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,717
    The ACLJ had argued that since Congress, in a proposal sponsored by California Congressman Duncan Hunter, transferred control of the property to the federal government, and that plan was signed into law by President Bush in August, the city as a defendant was now out of the case.
    Thank you, Rep. Duncan Hunter!

    The court also reversed a $275,000 attorney fee award received by an ACLU-backed lawyer for plaintiff Phillip Paulsen
    It's nice to see the ACLU take it in the shorts for a change!

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  4. #4
    Senior Member nittygritty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,251
    What is it about this "little ole" Cross, that makes these mighty atheist just pee their britches? You would think that instead of being atheist they might be Vampires, with their insane phobia against any and all crosses. It seems to drive them to the brink of madness, to see any cross, nativity scene, or bible anywhere in public. I feel sorry for them, and I totally beliee when their time comes do die, they will cry out for Jesus, or God to save them. I just wish in the meantime, they would leave those of us alone, the majority of us I might add, who are not offended to see a cross overlooking the graves of our Soldiers, or a cross on the side of a road meant to pay tribute to a fallen Tropper.
    Build the dam fence post haste!

  5. #5
    Senior Member Neese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sanctuary City
    Posts
    2,231
    This is a Christian nation, if you don't like it, get out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •