Print Page - Mt. Soledad

Mt. Soledad Cross Needs to Stay Put, Says War Veteran

by Allie Martin
May 24, 2005

(AgapePress) - San Diego residents will have a chance to vote on the future of a war memorial that is one of the city's most recognizable landmarks.

During a special election in late July, voters in San Diego will be asked whether a cross and property known as the Mount Soledad War Memorial should be transferred to the federal government. The 43-foot-tall cross was built in 1952 to honor veterans of the Korean War. But nearly 16 years ago, a local military veteran, who is an atheist, sued the city, claiming the cross violated the Constitution.

Rod McDougal is a local pastor who is chaplain emeritus of VFW Post 2111. He says the cross should be allowed to stay.

"This is a historical landmark of our civilization [and a testimony to] what has happened in America over the last 200 years," McDougal explains. "When our country was formed, it was primarily formed by Christian preachers and businessmen who said 'We want a country that is Christian, where people can worship freely.'"

For that reason, the veteran says the battle for the cross is an important one. "This represents a historical landmark that we have been Christian [in this nation] and that we are going to be," he maintains. "[T]here are a handful of atheists and ACLU representatives who say 'Hey, it's not in the Constitution' -- well, they're wrong. The Constitution says there shall be no law against the establishment of worship and praising and ministering unto the Lord."

Last week the San Diego City Council voted to place on the July 26 ballot a measure that will ask voters if the cross and the property on which it stands should be deeded to the U.S. government, which could then designate it as a federal monument. (See earlier story)

http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion02766.shtml

Additional information on ChristiansUnite.com is available on the Internet at http://www.christiansunite.com/
Copyright © 2003 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.

The Mt. Soledad Cross...
(http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:7vfoeZLlMl4J:sandiegoblog.com/uploads/mt-soledad-cross.jpg) (http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:v3CpLCUp24AJ:http://photos1.blogger.com/img/34/1169/640/Soledad1.jpg) (http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:wJVJGJnbU_sJ:www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040728/images/2004-07-28n_soledad.jpg)
(http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:HUgje_RADmMJ:images.ibsys.com/2002/0225/1252526.jpg) (http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:R2XPDFGWfwkJ:www.erealestatelajolla.com/images/laJollaInfo/mtSoledadMemorialCross.jpg) (http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:eZSSEu-8qNsJ:www.soledadmemorial.com/images/annualmeeting.jpg)

To those who wish to hide or destroy this monument, may the Lord grant them the wisdom and understanding to enable them to see beyond their shortsightedness.

Why are they doing this? It is because everytime they look upon the Mt. Soledad Cross they are reminded they are in danger of being lost, and in order to live for eternity they must acknowledge there is a presence in the universe "bigger" than they are. "They" can never create their perfect socialistic “utopia on earth” until all vestiges of anything better (eternal Heaven!) are erased from all human minds.

While it is the mission of each evangelical to proclaim Christ as the only Way, it is the mission of “them” to shut us up using any means necessary: lies, deceit, illusions, false prophecy, (the ACLU ::)), false guilt through ‘political correctness’, public school policy, legalization of sin, etc., etc., etc.

Only satan himself is more selfish than the individuals who would purposely steal the ultimate symbol of the depth of God’s love from the vast majority who are comforted by its inspirational presence.

jn

PS - Notice the tall fence around the base of the Cross. It looks like a 'security' fence. I wonder why it's there?

Atheist Throws Legal Challenge at Wording of Mt. Soledad Cross Ballot Initiative

by James L. Lambert
June 3, 2005

(AgapePress) - James McElroy, the attorney for atheist Philip Paulson, has told five San Diego area personalities that he will file a legal challenge next week to the proposed wording of a July 26 City of San Diego ballot initiative. The initiative will determine the fate of the 43-foot cross located on city land atop Mt. Soledad in nearby La Jolla.

The area personalities identified in the threat include KFMB radio talk-show host Rick Roberts, KOGO radio talk-show host Roger Hedgecock, San Diego Padres baseball club announcer Jerry Coleman, Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, and SoledadNational.com director Phil Thalmeimer. All five men recently signed off on the wording for the July 26 city-wide initiative.

McElroy claims that a number of their statements on the ballot are "false and misleading." Some statements at issue include, "as in the case with Mount Soledad, wherever veterans are honored with the symbols of the fallen, an intolerant few will launch frivolous lawsuits that waste our tax dollars ...." Another statement being challenged says, "in 2004, the President of the United States signed legislation designating the Mount Soledad site as a 'National War Memorial,' necessitating the land transfer." Other wording that will be legally challenged includes the sentence, "Vote Yes to transfer the land to the federal government and to permanently preserve Mount Soledad -- as it is where it is."

On Friday, Roberts indicated by phone that he and the others "will defend the wording in court." While there has been "a legal challenge against all five of us, I think we will prevail in court." Roberts stressed that this issue is important for those who want to preserve the heritage of San Diego, which includes the La Jolla cross. Donations for that cause are being taken by both radio announcers and at SoledadNational.com.

Roberts also appears as a regular stand-in for Michael Savage's nationally syndicated radio show, while Hedgecock substitutes for Rush Limbaugh occasionally. Coleman was recently elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame as a radio announcer. Induction ceremonies are to take place this summer.
AgapePress, is the author of Porn in America (Huntington House), which can be purchased through the American Family Association. He is a licensed real-estate mortgage loan sales agent and can be contacted through his website.

http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion02817.shtml

Additional information on ChristiansUnite.com is available on the Internet at http://www.christiansunite.com/
Copyright © 2003 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.

Attorney LiMandri Contends Plaintiff Wants to Eradicate America's Religious Heritage

By James Lambert
October 7, 2005

(AgapePress) - Attorney Charles LiMandri presented arguments Monday in a San Diego Superior Court to appeal a decision by Judge Patricia Yim Cowett regarding a July city-wide vote that determined the fate of the Mt. Soledad Cross in La Jolla, California. In her August decision, Cowett invalidated the vote of 197,125 San Diegans who wanted to transfer the city land where the Mt. Soledad Cross is located to the federal government.

That vote (Proposition A) effectively sanctioned the transfer of the 51-year-old cross, the war memorial, and the land where it stands to the U.S. Department of the Interior to become a national war memorial. The Mt. Soledad Cross was constructed at its present site in 1954 to commemorate veterans of the Korean War. The proposition won by a 76% plurality.

As West Coast Director of the Thomas More Law Center, LiMandri was recently hired by the City to represent its cause, pro-bono, as a Special Deputy City Attorney in the case. LiMandri argued in court on Monday that Cowett’s ruling contradicts a past Supreme Court decision that indicates the party in question (the City of San Diego) has to be “entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion.”

In his arguments LiMandri stated that “this court would have to find the entire California Constitution itself to be unconstitutional . That is because the preamble of the California constitution states: ‘We the people of the state of California, grateful to almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetrate its blessings, do establish this Constitution.’”

The lawyer also contends that if Judge Cowett “is inclined to consider evidence of statements made by individual lawmakers and private citizens to determine the constitutional purpose … then the Court should also consider the motives of those seeking to compel the City to remove the cross from the Mt. Soledad Memorial.”

In his Court-submitted brief LiMandri said that “it is only fair and reasonable for the Court to be apprised of the anti-Christian motives of [the] Plaintiff” (Philip Paulson). Paulson along with attorney James McElroy have been seeking the removal of the historic Cross for over 16 years. McElroy has close ties to the American Civil Liberties Union and serves as director of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

LiMandri's brief provides a quote from Paulson given on May 3, 2005: “[W]e need to make a full attack on Jesus… ‘A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord …’ Well according to the Holy Bible, Jesus Christ was a bastard and a rape baby. After all, the christian god the father raped the Virgin Mary when she was only 13 years of age, and then the all-knowing and all-powerful god became a dead-beat dad who later set up his own bastard son’s execution.”

The brief further notes that “such hateful statements attacking the most sacred and profoundly held beliefs of a great many people in this county, reveal the Plaintiff’s deep hostility towards Christianity.” LiMandri summarizes by saying that this case “represents a classic example of the tyranny of a tiny minority, whereby those few decidedly anti-Christian and Anti-American purposes are trying to use the courts to promote overt hostility toward religion.”

All sides believe the Judge will not change her July decision that effectively nullified the vote of over 197,000 voters. The decision is expected soon, and once it is finalized, LiMandri is planning further appeals. Ultimately, the Thomas More Center lawyer says he believes the case of the Mt. Soledad Cross is headed for the Supreme Court.

Most Christians knew the truth behind this but now there is written proof of what is behind this battle.

______________

By Allie Martin and Jenni Parker
October 12, 2005

(AgapePress) - An attorney with the Thomas More Law Center says comments by an atheist involved in the battle over a veterans memorial in California show that the fight is not about the Constitution but instead is all about attacking Christianity.

For more than 15 years now, atheist Philip Paulson has said he wanted to maintain neutrality between the government and religion. That, he claims, is why he has waged a legal battle to have a 43-foot cross removed from atop Mount Soledad in San Diego, California, where the cross stands as part of a memorial to American war veterans.

However, comments attributed to Paulson were recently discovered on the website of the Atheist Coalition of San Diego -- comments that a lawyer representing the city in its 16-year fight to keep the Mt. Soledad cross in place believes reveal much about what is driving one man's war against the Christian symbol central to local landmark and war memorial.

Charles LiMandri of the Thomas More Law Center says he had someone investigate to find out what Paulson has been saying behind the scenes and the atheist combatant "has just said some phenomenally shocking things" in reference to Christianity. "I don't know if you want me to repeat it or not," the attorney cautions, "because I don't want to offend."

But according to his sources, LiMandri says Paulson has called for "a full-out attack on Jesus" and "takes these basic truths that we accept as the revelation of God and just drags them through the mud." The atheist's reported comments allegedly included crude references to Jesus, God, and Mary, and the Christian lawyer claims to have other documents that detail the man's vehement hostility toward Christianity.

"People need to know what we're dealing with," the attorney says, "because most atheists that you would talk to don't care about religious symbols on public property. It doesn't really mean anything to them. They'll look at the cross or they'll look at the Ten Commandments and they'll say, 'Well, I don't believe in that, but if someone else does, fine.'"

But then, LiMandri adds, there are people like Phil Paulson who, in his singular hostility towards Christianity, "is a very small minority -- pretty much a minority of one." The Thomas More Law Center representative says people like Paulson apparently "believe they just hate God, and they're out to hurt him to the extent that they can eradicate his presence entirely from the public square."

An Embattled Emblem's Controversy Continues

The Mt. Soledad cross has been challenged as a violation of the California Constitution, which document prohibits the display of religious symbols on state land. Last November, voters rejected a ballot initiative that would have authorized sale of the land to a private entity, and the measure was defeated amid widespread confusion over its wording.

Then, in May, after a massive signature-gathering effort by supporters of the Mt. Soledad cross, San Diego's City Council agreed to allow a measure called Proposition A on a July special election mayoral ballot. That measure proposed a handover of the land on which the Mt. Soledad veterans memorial stands to the U.S. Department of the Interior, which would make the property federal land, federal laws being less restrictive than California's state code.

In the July election, an overwhelming 76 percent of the voters approved the transfer. However, according to a FOX News report, San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre told local press that transferring the cross from the city to the federal government would be unconstitutional if done primarily to preserve a religious symbol.

Opponents of the cross filed lawsuits, arguing that Proposition A was illegal and, last week, San Diego County Superior Court Judge Patricia Yim Cowett agreed. In her ruling, the judge said the claim that the Mt. Soledad cross is a military memorial to be saved as a landmark is "a sham."

Ruling on a 15-year-old ACLU case, a federal judge today ordered the city of San Diego to remove a mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.

U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson said, "It is now time, and perhaps long overdue, for this court to enforce its initial permanent injunction forbidding the presence of the Mount Soledad cross on city property," the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

Thompson ruled in 1991 the Mount Soledad cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state" but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy for more than a decade.

ACLU lawyer James McElroy believes San Diego officials finally will give up their fight.

"I don't think the city has its heart in taking more action," he said, according to the paper.

A city lawyer argued during the hour-long court hearing today that citizens had voted for transfer of the land under the cross.

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

The ballot initiative came about after the city refused to donate the cross and memorial to the federal government. A group called San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial took just 23 days to gather 105,000 signatures.

In a ruling now on appeal, however, a Superior Court judge found the transfer unconstitutional.

The Union-Tribune said the group behind the public vote on transfer likely will appeal Thompson's decision.

The 29-foot cross has stood on Mount Soledad as the center of a war memorial on city land since 1954. The first cross on the site was built in 1913.

A bill authorizing the federal government to take over the memorial was authored by Republican U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter and Randy Cunningham. President Bush signed the bill into law in December.

Responding to today's ruling, Mayor Jerry Sanders said he would recommend the city council and city attorney take action to save the cross.

The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. 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.

During its brief period of ownership, the Memorial Association made significant improvements, including extensive landscaping and the addition of more than 3,000 plaques honoring military veterans.

ACLU Wins Removal of Mount Soledad Cross

US District Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. told the City of San Diego on Wednesday to either remove a Christian war memorial cross from Mount Soledad within 90 days or pay $5,000 per day fine, thereafter. Judge Thompson had already sided with the ACLU, in his original 1991 decision, that the cross was unconstitutional. Since then, his decision has been in appeal.

Backed by the ACLU, San Diego atheist Philip Paulson filed the original suit to remove the cross, asserting that it violated California’s constitutional provision of separation of church and state, in 1989. The California courts also rejected a plan to sell the property to a private interest, so that the cross could remain, and the US Supreme Court refused to hear the case in 2003.

The San Diego Union-Tribune quotes San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders as having said: “Seventy-five percent of the voters said they thought it was extremely important. I think we need to go to an appeal.”

A ballot measure, Proposition A, to transfer ownership of the cross from the city to the federal government was voted on and passed by 76% of San Diego voters in July. President Bush had also signed a bill authorizing the federal government to assume responsibility for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial. However, a San Diego Superior Court judge ignored the voters and ruled it unconstitutional.

Chris Clark, pastor of East Clairemont Southern Baptist Church commented: “We were disappointed in the fact that he would not allow that to run its course before he would go and issue this order to have the cross taken down. But, all things considered, it’s not altogether surprising since he was the one that made the original ruling in 1991 that the cross was unconstitutional.”

Sign The Petition To Save Mt. Soledad Cross

Help the ACLJ stop the ACLU from re-writting our history.

Stop the ACLU!

The ACLU has done it again. In their campaign to rid our country of every vestige of God and Christianity, they have convinced a federal judge to order the removal of a cross from San Diego’s Mount Soledad memorial to heroes of the Korean War. We must fight back to save this religious symbol from demolition! Please read the form carefully and declare your membership with the ACLJ by signing the Petition below.

Petition to Save San Diego’s Mount Soledad Cross

President George W. Bush
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California
Mayor Jerry Sanders of San Diego
U.S. Senate Leadership
San Diego City Council

The federal court’s ruling that the cross on San Diego’s Mount Soledad must be immediately removed is an abomination and an affront to God-fearing Americans everywhere. We understand the ACLU is behind this unprecedented effort to remove the cross that has been in place, in one form or another, for nearly 100 years. The cross is part of a war memorial honoring the men and women who gave their lives to defend our freedoms as a nation.

We urge you today to take whatever action is necessary to save the Cross. We cannot allow the ACLU to re-write history and strip our nation of the symbols that have long been an important part of our heritage. Please put the full extent of your power to bear to stop this ruling in its tracks and save the Cross at Mount Soledad.

https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?SC=3163&AC=1

Lawmaker denounces cross removal
Introduces bill to fight ACLU, curb judicial power

Angered by a judge's order to remove the giant Mount Soledad cross in San Diego, a California state lawmaker is introducing a bill to protect symbols of American heritage that have a religious aspect.

The Defense of Veterans Memorials Act would be the first state legislation of its kind, mirroring the federal Public Expression of Religion Act, introduced in the House last year, which would remove from judges the authority to award attorney fees, or damages to groups such as the ACLU.

As WorldNetDaily reported May 3, U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego to remove the mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.

Thompson ruled in 1991 the cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state," but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. 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.

During its brief period of ownership, the Memorial Association made significant improvements, including extensive landscaping and the addition of more than 3,000 plaques honoring military veterans.

Pointing out "separation of church and state" is not mentioned in the Constitution, the California bill's sponsor, Republican Sen. Jim Battin, said the term should not be used to "destroy any remnants or images of Christianity."

"The hatred of a religious symbol is not a just cause to tear down memorials that hold noteworthy meaning," he said. "Is the Arlington National Cemetery next on the hit list?"

The bill is scheduled for hearing today in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Battin, whose bill was introduced at the urging of the American Legion, said there has been a dramatic increase in litigation in California and around the country by special interest organizations against the public display of symbols of America's history and heritage.

Cities have been strong-armed into removing religious symbols from their city seals, law enforcement emblems and city property because they can't afford to defend themselves, Battin pointed out.

"The very threat of imposition of attorney fees or damages in such cases," said a statement by Battin, "has a coercive and chilling effect on debate, deliberation and decision-making by public officials when faced with the duty to decide what symbols of our American history or heritage may or may not be displayed in the public sphere without offending somebody, if those symbols, no matter how historical, traditional, or time honored, contain a religious symbol."

In Los Angeles, for example, the ACLU threatened the county Board of Supervisors with a lawsuit if officials did not remove a small cross from among the many symbols on its more than 50-year-old county seal

Members of the board, which voted 3-to-2 to comply with the ACLU's demand, publicly said they feared court-ordered attorney fees to be paid by taxpayer funds if the ACLU were to prevail.

Nevertheless, the county was faced with paying an estimated $1 million to replace all its seals.

"Laws that were created to preserve religious freedom and protections are now being manipulated to destroy them," said Battin. "This is inherently wrong. My bill aims to keep scare-tactics and threats of costly lawsuits from determining the outcome on such suits."

Similar suits have been brought against the city of Redlandsm, Calif., for having a cross on its city seal; the Federal Mojave Desert World War I Veterans' Memorial which consists of two pipes strapped together and mounted on a rock outcrop by veterans in 1934 to honor World War I veterans; and the Boy Scouts of America for having Christian themes and symbols in their manuals.

Latest Ruling Could Spell End of Long Legal Battle Over Mt. Soledad Cross

by Allie Martin and Jody Brown
May 5, 2006

(AgapePress) - - A Christian activist in Southern California says it's time for the Chief Executive to get involved in a years-long legal scuffle involving a mountaintop cross in a San Diego park.

U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson has ordered the city of San Diego to remove the Mt. Soledad cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day. The 29-foot cross has stood on Mt. Soledad as the centerpiece of a war memorial on city-owned land since 1954. But in 1989 atheist Paul Paulson sued the city, claiming the cross violated the so-called "separation of church and state" principle.

The legal battle has ensued in the intervening years, ultimately leading up to a voter referendum last summer in which voters approved a measure that called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of a veterans memorial. But a San Diego Superior Court judge ruled the proposition -- approved by almost 76 percent of voters -- was a violation of the state constitution.

Now Judge Thompson -- who incidentally is the same judge who in 1991 ruled the presence of the cross on city property to be unconstitutional -- has evidently had enough. "It is now time, and perhaps long overdue," he said in this week's ruling, "for this court to enforce its initial injunction forbidding the presence of the Mount Soledad cross on city property."

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders has indicated he is willing to appeal the ruling, but City Attorney Mike Aguirre says that would be a waste of time and resources. However, a group known as San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial has indicated it might be willing to help the city financially with the appeal and any fines resulting in the meantime.

So, is all hope lost for those who wish the cross to stay where it is? James Lambert, a Christian activist who lives in the area, does not think so. Lambert says President George W. Bush could bring an end to the matter.

"We're asking Christians all over the country to contact and e-mail the president to ask him to designate Mount Soledad Cross as a national war memorial -- and we plead with him as brothers in Christ to do that," says the San Diego activist.

Lambert points to last summer's ballot initiative -- and moves at the federal level even -- as proof there is a strong interest to keep the cross. "The Congress voted to make the Mount Soledad Cross a war memorial, [and] the city of San Diego residents by a 76 percent plurality voted to do that also," he points out.

"[So] I'm asking Christians all over the country to contact the President and ask him to sign an executive order to designate [the memorial and cross as] federal land without getting the permission of the city of San Diego."

In legislation signed by the president in December 2004, the federal government essentially gave the city of San Diego that option. The outcome of that offer was the initiative approved by voters last summer -- and then struck down a few months later.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, the Mount Soledad Memorial Association is making plans to move the cross to private property nearby. The Association's president tells the newspaper his group feels it is very important that the cross be saved. "The location of the cross is not the primary issue," says William Kellogg.

Additional information on ChristiansUnite.com is available on the Internet at http://www.christiansunite.com/
Copyright © 2003 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.

http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion04415.shtml

Bush asked to intervene in cross battle

SAN DIEGO – Mayor Jerry Sanders on Thursday sought presidential intervention in the legal battle over the Mount Soledad cross, asking President Bush to use the power of eminent domain to take the city-owned property in La Jolla on which the memorial and cross sit.

Sanders warned of the “uncertain future” of the monument and said he fully supported the federal government condemning the property to save the cross, a request first made late Wednesday by Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine.

Sanders announced the move Thursday morning at a news conference at the top of Mount Soledad, arguing the federally registered national war memorial at Mount Soledad has been part of San Diego's landscape for more than 50 years.

“San Diego is the home of the largest concentration of active duty and retired military service members in the country. Our region has a proud history of paying tribute to our fallen soldiers,” the mayor wrote.

“The citizens of San Diego have repeatedly demonstrated their support for maintaining the memorial. It would be truly unfortunate to lose this sacred monument.”

The cross atop Mount Soledad has been the subject of legal challenges for 17 years. A federal judge recently ordered that the cross be removed within 90 days or the city will face a fine of $5,000 a day.

“This nationally registered war memorial has been caught up in a long series of court actions that threaten its future,” Sanders wrote in the letter. “I commend Congressman Hunter for doing everything possible to preserve the integrity of this important shrine to our fallen soldiers and support the congressman's recommendation.”

In his letter to the president, Hunter briefly reviewed the history of Mount Soledad, saying the 29-foot cross “can be seen as a welcoming symbol to sailors as they return to the home port at North Island.”

“Unfortunately, this beloved memorial has been under siege by a single individual and his team of lawyers who have ignored the broader historical context and community support for the memorial in order to make a political point,” Hunter wrote.

Hunter blamed “liberal judges” and their interpretation of the state constitution to justify the removal of the cross from city property.

Hunter asked the president to use his authority to begin “immediate condemnation proceedings” to bring Mount Soledad into the federal park system. The cross has been designated a national veterans memorial.

“I don't know why anyone would think a cross on city land would be any different than a cross on federal land,” said James McElroy, the attorney who has advocated the removal of the cross. “I think it is probably one of the silliest ideas I've heard of.

“If anything came of it, I would waltz right back to the court and the court would say the same thing it's been saying for the past 17 years.”

City Attorney Michael Aguirre weighed in on the issue Thursday afternoon – several hours after the mayor's press conference – and he questioned whether the request for federal condemnation of the property violated an existing judicial order.

“Such a move may be viewed by the San Diego Superior and United State District courts as being in violation of existing judicial orders and could result in a contempt finding and or sanctions against the city of San Diego,” Aguirre said in a statement.

Aguirre said the proper action being contemplated by the City Council was the proposed appeal of the federal court order to remove the cross, an action he said falls “within the city's legal rights.”

The fate of the cross has been debated since 1989, when atheist Philip Paulson sued seeking its removal. A federal judge found the presence of the cross on city property unconstitutional in 1991 but that decision was appealed.

Courts have invalidated three land transfers, including two sales to a private group and a gift to the federal government, intended to keep the cross intact. In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the city's appeal.

Federal condemnation of the property by the Department of Interior and Department of Justice do not require a finding that the property is blighted, which is required in some eminent domain proceedings. Sanders said he hoped the federal and state governments could quickly come to a stipulated agreement to transfer the half-acre on which the memorial sits.

“This judgment would permit these proceedings to conclude in less than the 90-day time frame given to us by the court,” Sander said at the morning news conference he held near the base of the cross with about two dozen supporters behind him.

Sanders said he's going to Washington, D.C., in a couple of weeks and that preserving the cross is one of the most important topics he will be addressing.

Although the mayor said it was his hope that the federal action would put an end to the lengthy challenges and litigation to the cross, he said he would like the city to pursue legal appeals.

“While this is an important and exciting development, I'll still recommend to the City Council that we concurrently pursue the stay and the appeal. We need to cover every base,” he said.

The council is to consider appealing the matter on May 23.

Sanders said he is taking his “marching orders” from San Diego voters who have twice voted to keep the property as a war memorial.

“Some say this debate is about the cross. I could not disagree more. This is not about just a Christian symbol,” the mayor said. “What this boils down to is preserving a nationally registered war memorial that is an integral part of San Diego's history. . . . It is part of our social and cultural fabric.”

Mayoral spokesman Fred Sainz said the idea to seek federal condemnation of the property has been kicked around by city officials and others for about a week, since the most recent court ruling. Sainz said Sanders' and Hunter's staffs discussed the issue and decided it would be best if the congressman made the request to President Bush for legal reasons.

American Legion joins cross fray
Calls on Bush to save judge-endangered war memorial in San Diego

The commander of the American Legion has joined those calling for President Bush to take action to save the Mount Soledad cross veterans memorial in Southern California, which a federal judge has ordered removed.

In a letter to the president, National Commander Thomas L. Bock wrote, "We are particularly concerned in this case that a dangerous precedent could be set that would endanger veterans memorials across America, perhaps even the 9,000 crosses that mark the final resting places of our World War II heroes at Normandy Beach."

As WorldNetDaily reported, May 3 U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego to remove the mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.

Thompson ruled in 1991 the cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state," but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. 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.

"The crosses and Stars of David that mark the graves and honor the sacrifices of our fallen heroes are sacred ground to Americans," wrote Bock, who represents 2.7 million veterans . "As a grateful nation, we must ensure that their memory will never be dishonored by those who would seek to remove them."

The American Legion is conducting a campaign in support of the Public Expression of Religion Act (PERA), H.R. 2679, which is pending in the House of Representatives. The measure would remove the authority for judges to award taxpayer monies in attorneys fees in Establishment Clause cases involving litigation against religions icons and veterans memorials.

The American Family Association is asking citizens to send an e-mail to the president to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

Last year, 76 percent of San Diegans voted to approve the transfer of the national memorial to federal custody.

Citizens prepare appeal to save cross
Asking 9th Circuit to halt order removing landmark in August

A citizens group has launched an appeal to halt a judge's order to remove the Mount Soledad cross in Southern California.

As WorldNetDaily reported, on May 3 U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego to remove the mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.

Thompson ruled in 1991 the cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state," but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

A group formed last year to save the cross, San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, filed papers in the U.S. District Court in San Diego asking to intervene in the case, the first step in an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The San Diego City Council is scheduled to vote next week on whether it will appeal the order, scheduled to be carried out in August.

The citizens group is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, which says it has "pledged to do whatever we can to save" the cross.

"The memorial represents the sacrifices our veterans and their families have made and the gratitude that we, as a community and a nation, have for them," said Charles LiMandri, West Coast regional director for the Law Center. "They fought hard for our freedoms. We will fight hard to preserve them."

The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. 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 and remanded back to district court to work out a remedy.

LiMandri says the Law Center is seeking a stay of the judge's order pending resolution of a state court case that could render the order void.

The state case addresses the constitutionality of a voter proposition, which transfers the memorial and the property to the federal government.

San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial organized a petition drive for the special election last July in which 76 percent of voters favored the transfer.

A state court judge, however, claimed the proposition violated the California Constitution.

LiMandri explained that the outcome of the state case likely will impact the federal case because the federal judge's order to the city of San Diego was based on state law. Once Proposition A takes effect, the property will belong exclusively to the federal government.

LiMandri warns that unless the judge's order is reversed or stayed by the 9th Circuit, San Diego will be required to take down the cross in August.

Meanwhile, >the commander of the American Legion has joined those calling for President Bush to take action to save the cross.

In a letter to the president, National Commander Thomas L. Bock wrote, "We are particularly concerned in this case that a dangerous precedent could be set that would endanger veterans memorials across America, perhaps even the 9,000 crosses that mark the final resting places of our World War II heroes at Normandy Beach."

"The crosses and Stars of David that mark the graves and honor the sacrifices of our fallen heroes are sacred ground to Americans," wrote Bock, who represents 2.7 million veterans. "As a grateful nation, we must ensure that their memory will never be dishonored by those who would seek to remove them."

The American Family Association is asking citizens to send an e-mail to the president to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

Cross battle taken to Washington
San Diego mayor meets with Bush, congressman with Cheney

In an effort supported by Christian advocacy groups nationwide, San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders met with White House lawyers in Washington, D.C., to ask President Bush to issue an executive order that would save the Mount Soledad cross after a judge ruling in a case brought by the ACLU ordered it removed.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., also discussed the issue yesterday with Vice President Dick Cheney.

Sanders told the Copley News Service the president's lawyers "indicated it's going to be tough to get this done and we're going to have to work real hard, and they'll give us as many options as they can."

As WorldNetDaily reported, U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego May 3 to remove the mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day. Thompson ruled in 1991 the 29-foot structure violates the so-called "separation of church and state," but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

The American Family Association has launched a campaign asking citizens to send an e-mail to the president to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

The order would complete the annexation of city land first initiated by Hunter in November 2004. One month later, Congress passed legislation requesting transfer of the war memorial site to the federal park system. Last summer, 76 percent of voters in a special election in San Diego agreed to the transfer but courts, citing California law, blocked the vote.

Meanwhile, a group formed last year to save the cross, San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, has filed papers in the U.S. District Court in San Diego asking to intervene in the case, the first step in an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The citizens group is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, which says it has "pledged to do whatever we can to save" the cross.

Charles LiMandri, West Coast regional director for the Law Center, says that after reviewing case law, he believes federal jurisdiction is much more tolerant of religious icons located on federal property.

A cross has been at the present location, in one form of another, since 1913. Sanders and many citizens consider the cross and the war memorial an important part of San Diego's history. The battle began in 1989 when Phillip Paulsen, an atheist, filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross.

Tim Wildmon, president of American Family Association, says more than 247,000 e-mails have been sent to President Bush in nine days.

His father, AFA founder Rev. Don Wildmon, has contacted the White House about the issue.

Tim Wildmon is using his weekday show on American Family Radio, "Today's Issues" to bring the debate to the attention listeners to more than 180 radio stations.

Jay Sekulow, head of the American Center for Law & Justice, also is asking his radio audience to communicate with the White House.

Last week, Rev. Jerry Falwell told WND he planned to contact the Bush administration. Gary Cass of Coral Ridge Ministries in Florida has also pledged his support.

Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Fund and Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council are planning a press conference at the Mt. Soledad site today to urge supporters to come to San Diego to help save the cross.

Mahoney said in a statement "it must be constantly stressed that the Constitution promises freedom of religion not freedom from religion."

"Therefore, we are issuing a national call for the faith community and people of good will to come to San Diego and peacefully intervene to prevent the removal of the cross," he said. We can no longer be silent as our freedoms and history are being stripped away."

Legion challenges ACLU's 'secular cleansing'
Announcing project at San Diego cross to protect war memorials

Calling it an effort to stop the ACLU's "secular cleansing," the American Legion of California is launching a campaign to defend veterans' memorials, including the embattled Mount Soledad cross in San Diego.

American Legion officials will be at the Mount Soledad memorial today, the center of nationwide controversy after U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson – in a case brought by an atheist represented by the ACLU –ordered the city of San Diego May 3 to remove it within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day.

Thompson ruled in 1991 the 29-foot structure violates the so-called "separation of church and state," but the case has remained in courts.

"America's veterans memorials have become a casualty of litigation wars as atheists and special interest organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union pursue their fanatical secular cleansing agendas," said American Legion California Department Commander Wayne Parrish.

Parrish said the Legion intends to "fight back" through its new California Defense of Veterans Memorials Project, which will be directed by a former ACLU staff attorney, Legionnaire Rees Lloyd.

The project will include involvement in litigation through cooperation with the Alliance Defense Fund, a public-interest legal alliance with more than 850 attorneys.

The American Legion Department of California has about 130,000 war-time veteran members. About 2.7 million veterans are members of the Legion nationwide.

American Legion National Commander Thomas Bock has joined Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders in calling on President Bush to use his executive powers to save the cross at the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial by making it make the part of the federal park system

Before the court issued its order to tear down the cross, 76 percent of San Diego voters chose to save the memorial by transferring it to the federal government.

Sanders met with White House lawyers in Washington, D.C., earlier this week to ask Bush to issue an executive order. Hunter, R-Calif., also discussed the issue with Vice President Dick Cheney.

The American Family Association has launched a campaign asking citizens to send an e-mail to the president to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

A group formed last year to save the cross, San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, has filed papers in the U.S. District Court in San Diego asking to intervene in the case, the first step in an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Yesterday, Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Fund and Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council planned a press conference at the Soledad site to urge supporters to come to San Diego to help save the cross.

Mahoney said in a statement "it must be constantly stressed that the Constitution promises freedom of religion not freedom from religion."

"Therefore, we are issuing a national call for the faith community and people of good will to come to San Diego and peacefully intervene to prevent the removal of the cross," he said. We can no longer be silent as our freedoms and history are being stripped away."

San Diego Appeals Ruling to Remove Giant Cross

Hours before a court-ordered deadline, San Diego on Friday asked courts to stay a ruling by a federal judge who ordered a giant concrete cross removed from city-owned land. But Mayor Jerry Sanders signaled that if its appeal fails, the cross will come down and bring an end to a 17-year legal battle.

The city appealed a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson, Jr., who ordered the city to take down the 29-foot cross before Aug. 2 or pay daily fines of $5,000.

Thompson's May 3 ruling, which he described as "long overdue," found the cross to be an unconstitutional display of government preference of one religion over another. The city had until Friday to seek a stay of Thompson's ruling.

City Attorney Mike Aguirre filed a request for a stay with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The city filed a related appeal Wednesday challenging the judge's ruling in favor of atheist Philip Paulson, who sued over the cross that has stood for a half-century on public land atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla.

Aguirre said he did not expect the appeal to succeed, but maintained that the city had a duty to exhaust its options in order to respect the will of voters who approved a measure designed to preserve the cross. Both Aguirre and Sanders said that they would respect the appellate court's decision.

"If for any reason the stay is not granted, the city will observe the judge's ruling," Sanders said Friday. "In no case will the city pay a fine as a direct result of the judge's ruling."

Ever since Paulson filed suit in 1989, the city has tried to sell the property to a private buyer. But federal courts have repeatedly blocked the sale, saying the transactions were designed to favor a buyer who would maintain the cross. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the city's appeal in 2003.

San Diego voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot proposition last year to transfer the land beneath the cross to the federal government. That measure was designed to absolve the city of responsibility for the cross under the existing lawsuit, but a Superior Court judge found the proposition to be unconstitutional. The city also is appealing that decision.

In May, Sanders and Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked President Bush to exercise his power of eminent domain and preserve the cross. Sanders said Friday that the White House had not yet indicated whether it would act.

The cross was erected in 1954 to honor Korean War veterans.

Slain Marine's parents appeal to Bush to save cross
Officer killed in Iraq memorialized under symbol threatened by court order

The parents of a Marine who died in Iraq are urging President Bush to help ensure their son continues to be memorialized under a historic cross threatened by a judge's order.

Robert and Sybil Martino want the federal park service to take over the Mt. Soledad war memorial site from the city of San Diego, which is at the center of a 17-year dispute begun by an atheist charging the cross violates the so-called "separation of church and state."

The Martinos' son, Capt. Michael Martino, was killed in action in Iraq last November when his Cobra helicopter was shot down by a Russian shoulder-mounted SA-16 surface-to-air missile.

As WorldNetDaily reported, U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego May 3 to remove the mountain-top cross within 90 days or face a fine of $5,000 a day. Thompson ruled the 29-foot structure unconstitutional in 1991, but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

In a letter to Bush, the Martinos write, "Our son loved his country and the many rights and liberties it provided. … Our son died with a strong belief that he was fighting to preserve the freedom of all Americans. Please let us have OUR freedom from activist judges and their personal interpretation of our Constitution."

The Martinos also have asked military veterans Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., to approach the president.

Last month, members of the slain officer's Camp Pendleton unit, which recently returned from Iraq, dedicated a plaque at Mt. Soledad to commemorate his legacy. More than 300 fellow Marines stood in line for over three hours to pay their respects to the parents.

The Martinos expressed "the feelings of honor [they] felt at having their son memorialized for all time under the cross at Mt. Soledad."

The parents said "there is no better place on the West Coast to honor our fallen heroes than under that cross overlooking the country they fought and died to preserve."

Robert Marino, noting the cross's existence in one form or another since 1913, contends the Soledad cross "is no more an affront to personal beliefs than the thousands of crosses at Arlington."

Michael Martino, 32, was awarded posthumously a Purple Heart and promoted to the rank of Marine major. He enlisted in the Marine Corps after graduating from the University of California at San Diego.

His father characterized him "as a determined young man who was focused and always gave it his all."

According to Marine Maj. Thomas Dolan, Michael Martino "routinely demonstrated valor and poise despite the chaos" of war. ...

"He did a lot of dangerous work yet ... always played down what he did," Dolan said.

Col. Thomas D. Weidley, Michael Martino's commanding officer, said in a letter to the parents that their son "performed his duties above expectations. … He was always in the books, studying his aircraft, weapon systems and the enemy. One of the smartest pilots we have. … Sacrifice, selfless service and uncommon valor are the staples of this generation of American service members, to which Mike was a part. We miss him terribly. He will never be forgotten."

The Martinos are disturbed that one atheist would be allowed by the courts to dismantle a cross that forms a significant part of the historic war memorial.

In a letter to McCain, the Martinos asked, "is it fair to the majority and to those who have served or have fallen in the service for our nation who wish to keep the cross to appease a few who look to strip all religion from our country under a false interpretation of the separation of church and state? Our son died with a strong belief that he was fighting to preserve the freedom of all Americans."

Along with Hunter and McCain, the Martinos are asking newly elected Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray to help persuade the White House to federalize the site, making it a national war memorial.

The American Family Association has launched a campaign asking citizens to send an e-mail to the president to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

San Diego to Appeal to Keep Mt. Soledad Cross
by Pete Winn, associate editor

A citizen's group is asking for your help in keeping a 50-year-old symbol on public land.

The city of San Diego will appeal this week's decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding a ruling that ordered the city to remove the cross from the Mt. Soledad War Memorial by Aug. 1.

The city faces fines of $5,000 a day until it complies.

"The next stop in this case is the United States Supreme Court," American Center for Law and Justice Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow said. "The city is going to file a petition for review, but also ask for a stay of the judge's order. In fact, we're preparing a brief supporting the city right now."

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said he has asked City Attorney Mike Aguirre to file the petition asking the nation's highest court to take the case, which has raged for 17 years.

U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ruled in May that the city must remove the cross because it violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The 9th Circuit upheld that decision Wednesday.

Mayor Sanders said the city intends to defend the cross because the Mt. Soledad War Memorial is "part of our history as a city; part of our cultural fabric."

A San Diego citizens committee cheered the appeal. Phil Thalheimer, chairman of San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad War Memorial, said his group was delighted that the city will continue defending the 29-foot cross.

"We've been hoping that would happen all along," Thalheimer told CitizenLink. "We believe that this is a seminal case and that it really belongs in the Supreme Court."

Historically, there has been a cross where the current one stands for more than 90 years, the San Diego businessman said. There has been a memorial to Korean War veterans for more than 50 years, and the current cross has been the central feature all during that time.

Thalheimer said his group thinks the cross at the war memorial is a symbol of faith that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is determined to bring down.

"The ACLU has decided this will be the test case," he said. "If they can bring that monument down, they will carry that victory on to other symbols of faith — crosses, stars and maybe even crescents — and say, 'Look, we've already won in San Diego after 17 years; you can't beat us, so just capitulate.' "

In July 2004, more than 75 percent of voters in San Diego passed a ballot measure, Proposition A, to allow the city to give the Mt. Soledad cross — as well as the veterans' memorial — to the federal government to be placed under the jurisdiction of the National Parks Service.

Unfortunately, in his decision, Judge Thompson nullified that plan — and the 9th Circuit agreed.

"The 9th Circuit, as it has in so many cases, simply got it wrong," Sekulow said. "Remember, it was the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that said the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional, so you've got appeals-court judges who have this hostile view of religion, and believe that any public acknowledgement of faith is off-limits."

The civic group supporting the cross is calling on President Bush to help.

"What we've asked people to do is, through e-mails and phone calls or whatever method they want, to put pressure on the White House to make (the land's transfer to federal jurisdiction) happen," Thalheimer said. "And they need to make it happen in the next 21 days.

San Diego can't really afford to pay the $5,000-a-day fines, if the appeal fails.

"To put that into perspective, that would be the equivalent of keeping a city pool open for a week," he said. "The city simply cannot afford to eat that kind of fine."

In the end, there is a lot more at stake with the Mt. Soledad cross than meets the eye.

"I'm Jewish, a practicing Jew, and my family is Jewish," said Thalheimer, the son of Holocaust survivors. "But I'm standing for this monument because I think it's a freedom-of-speech issue — the right of people to express their religious views. It's exactly what happened in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, where the symbols of faith were taken down at the rise of fascism.

"We can't let that happen here. We're not going to."

TAKE ACTION
Please contact President Bush and ask him to direct the National Parks Service to honor the wishes of San Diego citizens and acquire the Mt. Soledad War Memorial, the Mt. Soledad Cross, and the land they sit on.

Mt. Soledad Case Goes To Supreme Court

Yesterday evening the City Attorney in San Diego along with Mayor Jerry Sanders decided to take the Mt. Soledad case to the Supreme Court of the United States. I have already assembled one of our Supreme Court teams to file briefs on behalf of the Members of Congress that we represent, as well as ACLJ Members across the country in this important case. It appears at this time that the City will be asking for both a stay of the Ninth Circuit decision as well as a petition for writ of certiorari. The stay of the decision will allow the monument to remain while the litigation is pending at the Supreme Court. The petition for certiorari will ask the Court to grant plenary review of the Ninth Circuit decision.

Generally, under Supreme Court practice, the Circuit Justice in charge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has the authority to grant the stay. In this case, the Circuit Justice is Anthony Kennedy. Justice Kennedy can either grant the stay, deny the stay, or refer the stay to the entire Supreme Court for determination. It takes five votes to obtain a stay. In order for the case to be reviewed by the Supreme Court on the merits, it only takes four votes.

California Conservative gives us the background from the 9th Circuit’s decision.

According to Thomas More Law Center

ANN ARBOR, MI – “A three–judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to stay Federal District Judge Gordon Thompson’s 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.

Richard Thompson, the Law Center’s President and Chief Counsel, commented on the recent order: “It is an outrage and insult not only to Christians, but people of all faiths, that this memorial site to our veterans and fallen war heroes would be desecrated by removal of a universally recognized symbol of sacrifice just because one atheist was upset about it. We will continue our legal fight to save the cross. A quick answer to the current legal challenge would be for the federal government to step in and take the land under its power of eminent domain. So far they have remained silent.”

Continued Thompson, “The Cross and memorial honors those Americans of all faiths who have given their lives to preserve our religious freedom; we are now called upon to do whatever it takes to prevent the courts from destroying the Cross that symbolizes our religious heritage and their sacrifice.”

What can I say that I haven’t said before? While the decision to go to the Supreme Court is potential good news, they still need to put a stay on the 9th Circuit’s decision. This entire episode could be solved if President Bush can be urged to intervene.

The Unalienable Right:

“The activist liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has essentially sided with those who want to destroy the Mt. Soledad war memorial.

He obviously has a lot on his plate right now, but it would be great if the president stepped in to help save the war memorial. All of our civilization’s enemies aren’t over in the Middle East.”

More from this press release:

“The national Catholic based advocacy group Fidelis delivered an impassioned letter Friday to the White House urging President Bush to intervene in the 16-year-long legal dispute over the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial. The 52-year-old veterans memorial outside San Diego has been under attack by an anti-Christian atheist because the memorial includes a 29-foot cross.”

Bush seeking reprieve for San Diego cross
Snow: Administration looking for ways to preserve veterans memorial

After telling WND yesterday he had an answer to a question about the battle over California's Mount Soledad cross, but didn't have it with him, presidential press secretary Tony Snow today provided a White House response to the controversy.

Yesterday, WND asked Snow at the press briefing: "In 2004, Congress designated the Mount Soledad 43-foot memorial cross in San Diego as a National Veterans Memorial. The San Diego City Council has voted against donating the land. And now, federal Judge Gordon Thompson has ordered the city to 'tear down this cross' by Aug. 1, or face fines of $5,000 a day. And my first of two questions: Can we count on the president to sign an executive eminent domain order transferring this land to the National Park Service, rather than allowing this destruction of a memorial to our Armed Forces dead?"

Responded Snow: "Believe it or not, I've got an answer to that, but I don't have it with me. … we have been asking for guidance on it, believe it or not, and so we will try to attach it as an asterisk. If it's not fully cooked, I'll make sure it's cooked tomorrow so you can ask me again."

Today, then, WND brought up the subject once more, to which Snow responded: "All right, we attached this as an asterisk yesterday, Lester, but I'll repeat it. Right now, the president and the administration are actively reviewing both administrative and legislative options for preserving that veterans war memorial."

WND also asked Snow about calls from commentators and lawmakers that the New York Times be prosecuted for divulging a secret financial-monitoring program used by the government to trace terrorists.

"Would you say that nothing the New York Times does would lead to prosecution, or if so, what?" asked WND.

Responded Snow: "Look, let me make this really clear. At the White House, we don't do legal referrals. That's the business of other people. I'm not getting involved in it."

War hero, ex-senator asks Bush to save cross
San Diego landmark to be removed by judge's order next month

Former POW and U.S. senator Jeremiah Denton has requested that President Bush authorize the federal government to take over the site of a historic San Diego cross scheduled to be removed by a judge's order.

In a letter recently delivered to the president, the war hero requested the federal government exercise its power of eminent domain in order to maintain the land as a national monument.

As WorldNetDaily reported, U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city of San Diego to remove the 43-foot structure by Aug. 1 or face a fine of $5,000 a day. Thompson ruled the cross unconstitutional in 1991, but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

The dispute was started by an atheist charging the cross – the centerpiece of a national war-veterans memorial – violates the so-called "separation of church and state."

Last week, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay the order. The court has scheduled oral arguments on the matter for the week of Oct. 16, weeks after the cross is to be removed.

Denton, a retired Navy rear admiral, spent nearly eight years as a POW in Vietnam. He was the first POW to tip off naval intelligence on the status of prisoners there by blinking his eyes in Morse code "t-o-r-t-u-r-e" during a televised interview taped in North Vietnam.

Denton has described how he clung to the only possession he had as a POW, a cross woven of bamboo strips given to him by a fellow prisoner.

Over the past month, the president has received more than 450,000 e-mails from various conservative and faith-based organizations to save the cross. The White House has informed a source from a well known pro-family organization who wishes to remain anonymous that it will respond to these requests soon.

Responding to a question from WND last week, presidential press secretary Tony Snow said: "Right now, the president and the administration are actively reviewing both administrative and legislative options for preserving that veterans war memorial."

Meanwhile, in Congress, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., introduced this week a bill to save the war memorial in its present form.

Hunter said in a statement, the memorial "has been a fixture of our local community for over 50 years, honoring veterans of all wars, including the global war on terrorism."

Unfortunately, the congressman said, "this memorial and its proud history has been identified as offensive and in violation of the California state constitution by liberal judges who have sided with a self-proclaimed atheist receiving legal and financial support from the ACLU."

Pointing to a special vote last year in which 76 percent of San Diegans chose to preserve the cross, Hunter said Judge Thompson's ruling "ignores the mandate delivered by the people of San Diego County and turns this beloved memorial into a political test case for liberal activists and their agenda."

Hunter also called removal of the cross "an insult to the men and women memorialized on its walls and the service and sacrifice of those who have worn a uniform in defense of our nation."

"It is important that we exhaust every possible option for preserving this revered memorial and ensuring its continued presence atop Mount Soledad," he said.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public-interest law firm that has battled to save the cross since 2004, says a quick solution would be for the federal government to step in and take the land under its power of eminent domain, but "so far they have remained silent."

In 2004, Congress paved the way for the cross to be preserved by designating the structure and the land on which it stands a national veterans memorial. The congressional action authorized the Department of the Interior to accept the property as a donation, to be administered under the National Park System.

Despite widespread support, however, the San Diego City Council declined to make the donation, prompting formation of a grass roots organization, "San Diegans for the Mt Soledad War Memorial," headed by Jewish businessman Philip Thalheimer.

The group led a petition drive, obtaining more than 100,000 signatures calling on the council to reverse its decision. The council put the question to voters in the special election in which 76 percent chose to preserve the cross. State Court Judge Patricia Cowett, however, ruled the proposition violated the California constitution. Her order is under appeal.

The American Family Association has launched a campaign asking citizens to send an e-mail to President Bush to effectively take "the case out of Judge Thompson's hands" by signing an executive order transferring the land to the National Park Service.

"The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Efforts to Save Mount Soledad Memorial Face Deadline

Activists trying to protect the Mount Soledad veterans' memorial in San Diego, Calif., say the Fourth of July weekend would be the perfect time for President Bush to appeal to his conservative base by taking federal possession of the monument under eminent domain.

The American Civil Liberties Union argues that allowing the 29-foot-tall cross to remain in a public park is an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion.

"If you've got 76 percent of the voters voting to save the cross, and you've got this groundswell of support from a lot of faith-based organizations ... it would make sense [to take action]," Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center told Cybercast News Service.

"Obviously the Fourth of July would be a great time to do it," added Thompson, whose firm represents the group "San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial."

The Mount Soledad cross was built in 1954 as a memorial to Korean War casualties and veterans. Since that time, the monument has expanded to add six granite walls featuring plaques of names and photos of veterans of the Korean and other wars.

The battle over the cross began in 1991 when Federal District Court Judge George Thompson ruled in favor of atheist Philip Paulson and ordered the city to remove the cross, citing the "no preference" clause of the California Constitution, which guarantees free exercise of religion without discrimination or preference.

In response, the city sold the land to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, but that sale was later ruled unconstitutional. The legal battle continued for more than a decade as further sales and other efforts to protect the monument were ruled unconstitutional, including a proposal to transfer the memorial to the federal government, which was supported by a 76 percent margin of voters in July 2005.

In May 2006, Judge Thompson told the city to comply with his 1991 order by removing the cross before Aug. 1 or face a $5,000-a-day fine.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Paulson in his efforts to have the monument removed, argued that allowing the cross, and another like it on Mount Helix, to remain amounts to a governmental endorsement of religion.

"They are prominent features atop hillsides in publicly-owned parks," Linda Hills, executive director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties, told the San Diego Union Tribune in 1998. "Their Christian import is clear and has been acknowledged by the courts. Their maintenance by the City and County, respectively, is tantamount to a governmental endorsement of Christianity.

"Their presence places a burden on the enjoyment of the parks by non-Christians," Hills added.

But Thompson disagreed, saying that the cross has a meaning that transcends religion.

"It would be a devastating tragedy that we would not recognize the sacrifice of these veterans and their families by honoring that with a cross, which is a universal symbol of sacrifice," he said.

The Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals denied a request to stay Judge Thompson's decision, limiting the options for those working to protect the Mount Soledad cross. The law center filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to stay Judge Thompson's decision. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy will review that motion.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) also introduced the "Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial Protection Act," Monday evening. The bill would transfer possession of the memorial to the federal government. The U.S. Military already manages similar memorials, such as Arlington National Cemetery, which is maintained by the Department of the Army, Thompson said.

"Removing this long recognized and respected landmark is an insult to the men and women memorialized on its walls and the service and sacrifice of those who have worn a uniform in defense of our nation," Rep. Hunter said in a statement. "It is important that we exhaust every possible option for preserving this revered Memorial and ensuring its continued presence atop Mt. Soledad."

Thompson said the problem efforts to save the memorial are facing now is lack of time.

"The most effective way to save the cross before August 1 would be for the President to act," he said. "That is the most promising as far as keeping the cross there before the deadline."

Rep. Hunter and San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders are also asking President Bush to intervene.

"Please use [your authority]...to begin immediate condemnation proceedings and bring this National Veterans' Memorial into the Federal Park System," Rep. Hunter wrote President Bush in May. "It would be a national travesty to have this veterans' memorial dismantled against the overwhelming majority of San Diego residents and federal legislative intent."

Thompson warned, however, that intervention by the executive branch does not guarantee that the battle will end.

"Even if the federal government takes over, that doesn't necessarily end the case, it just makes the previous litigation moot," he said. "If Paulson wants to start a new lawsuit challenging some aspect of the federal government taking over, he can certainly do that."

But Thompson added that, if Paulson and the ACLU of San Diego, which did not return calls seeking comment for this article, want to continue their attack on the monument, his group stands ready to defend it.

"We have made a pledge to fight this battle to the end," Thompson concluded, "and we are doing that."

Supreme Court justice
saves cross – for now
Kennedy steps in as 'national treasure'
weeks from removal by judge's order

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy intervened in a 17-year battle over a large cross on city property in San Diego, allowing the 29-foot structure to remain until its supporters complete a legal challenge.

As WorldNetDaily reported, U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson ordered the city to remove the structure by Aug. 1 or face a fine of $5,000 a day. Thompson ruled the cross unconstitutional in 1991, but the case has remained in courts and become an issue of public policy.

The dispute was started by an atheist charging the cross – the centerpiece of a national war-veterans memorial – violates the so-called "separation of church and state."

Kennedy issued a stay, without comment, that stops any legal proceedings while supporters of the cross battle in court.

Last month, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay Judge Thompson's order. The court has scheduled oral arguments on the matter for the week of Oct. 16, weeks after the cross was scheduled to be removed.

In 2004, Congress paved the way for the cross to be preserved by designating the structure and the land on which it stands a national veterans memorial. The congressional action authorized the Department of the Interior to accept the property as a donation, to be administered under the National Park System.

Despite widespread support, however, the San Diego City Council declined to make the donation, prompting formation of a grass roots organization, "San Diegans for the Mt Soledad War Memorial," headed by Jewish businessman Philip Thalheimer.

The group led a petition drive, obtaining more than 100,000 signatures calling on the council to reverse its decision. The council put the question to voters in the special election in which 76 percent chose to preserve the cross. State Court Judge Patricia Cowett, however, ruled the proposition violated the California constitution. Her order is under appeal.

Lawyers for San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial said in their appeal to the Supreme Court that they wanted to avoid the "destruction of this national treasure."

Last week, former POW and U.S. senator Jeremiah Denton requested that President Bush authorize the federal government to take over the site.

In a letter recently delivered to the president, the war hero requested the federal government exercise its power of eminent domain in order to maintain the land as a national monument.

Over the past month, the president has received more than 450,000 e-mails from various conservative and faith-based organizations to save the cross. The White House has informed a source from a well known pro-family organization who wishes to remain anonymous that it will respond to the requests soon.

Responding to a question from WND last week, presidential press secretary Tony Snow said: "Right now, the president and the administration are actively reviewing both administrative and legislative options for preserving that veterans war memorial."

Meanwhile, in Congress, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., introduced last week a bill to save the war memorial in its present form.

Hunter said in a statement, the memorial "has been a fixture of our local community for over 50 years, honoring veterans of all wars, including the global war on terrorism."

Kennedy delays cross removal

Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on Friday afternoon postponed a federal judge's order that would have required the city of San Diego to remove a Christian cross from city-owned land on a prominent hill, Mt. Soledad. Kennedy said that "the equities here support preserving the status quo" while the city pursues an appeal in federal court and a separate appeal in Califiornia state court. U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson has ordered the cross removed from city property by Aug. 1, and has imposed fines of $5,000 a day if that is not done.

Justice Kennedy blocked that order in a four-page in-chambers opinion.

The Justice issued a stay in response to a request from the city (application 05-A-1234). He denied as unnecessary a separate request for a stay from a war memorial group (application 05-A-1233).

In postponing the judge's removal order, Kennedy said there would be "irreparable harm of altering the memorial and removing the cross" while there would be only "slight harm" in a brief delay while the Ninth Circuit considers the city's appeal.

The Justice also found two other factors making the case "sufficiently unusual" -- first, that Congress has passed a resolution treating the monument as "a national memorial honoring veterans" and has authorized federal officials to take title to the memorial if the city donates it, and, second, the city's voters have approved a ballot measure authorizing the donation to the federal government. (The ballot measure has been struck down by a state court in California, but that is on appeal in the 4th District Califiornia Court of Appeal for expedited review.)

The Kennedy opinion did not mention it, but some city officials have said publicly that, if the transfer to the federal government is made with the aim of protecting the Christian cross, that would amount to a violation of the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause. Any such transfer, if it is allowed by state courts, almost certainly will be challenged -- and probably by the same San Diegan, Philip K. Paulson, an atheist who has been challenging the cross on city property since 1989.

Twice before, Kennedy noted, the Supreme Court had denied review of the Mt. Soledad cross controversy. But, on Friday, he said Congress' passage of a measure to take over the memorial came after prior lower court rulings in the case, and "its effect on the litigation has yet to be considered." And, despite the earlier Suipreme Court refusals to get involved, he added, "Congress' evident desire to preserve the memorial makes it substantially more likely that four Justices will agree to review the case in the event the Court of Appeals affirms the District Court's order."

The pending litigation in state court, according to Kennedy, may deal with state-law issues bearing upon the federal judge's removal order, providing guidance on the effect, if any, of Congress' action toward the memorial.

"The respect due both to Congress and to the parallel state-court proceedings persuades me that the District Court's order in this case should be stayed pending final disposition of the appeal" by the Ninth Circuit "or until further order of this Court. If circumstances change significantly, the parties may apply to this Court for reconsideration." (The Circuit Court had denied a stay.)

On July 3, Kennedy had issued a temporary stay pending further review of the delay requests.

House votes to acquire contested San Diego cross

The House voted 349-74 Wednesday to acquire a monumental cross and the park around it from the city of San Diego.

The 29-foot cross has been the target of a 17-year court battle between an atheist and the city, which owns the hilltop property where the monument stands.

A federal judge ruled in May that the cross cannot stand in the municipal park because it violates a state constitutional prohibition on the governmental endorsement of any one religion. That ruling is being appealed by the city.

San Diego-area congressman Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, said in floor debate that federal ownership would make the existing lawsuit moot and might also insulate the cross from further legal challenges under the U.S. Constitution.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court said it might be willing to consider the case once appeals have been exhausted.

City officials have argued that the cross, a symbol of Christianity, is part of a secular memorial commemorating veterans of the Korean War.

Under federal law, which is more flexible than California law, religious displays may stand on public property if they have a secular meaning.

In May, Hunter asked President Bush to exercise his powers of eminent domain to federalize the park property. The president declined to act on that request, but the administration endorsed Hunter's bill in a policy statement Wednesday.

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions has introduced an identical bill in the Senate.

Battle Over Mt. Soledad Memorial Cross Heats Up

I reported earlier about the House voting for a bill that seeks to acquire the land where Mt. Soledad Cross stands and keep the war memorial in place. Now the Thomas More Law Center has put out their press release with a lot more details including some of the ACLU’s deceptive actions. Here is part of the release…

Via Thomas More Law Center

President Bush, on the day of the vote, issued a “Statement of Administration Policy” that “strongly” supported H.R. 5683. The Statement read, in part, “In the face of legal action threatening the continued existence of the current Memorial, the people of San Diego have clearly expressed their desire to keep the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in its present form. Judicial activism should not stand in the way of the people, and the Administration commends Rep. Hunter for his efforts in introducing this bill.”

Over the past two years, the Law Center has provided thousands of attorney hours without charge to preserve the memorial cross from destruction by the ACLU-backed atheist Paulson. Charles LiMandri, the west coast director of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “This case is one that should concern all Americans. It is a direct attack on our national heritage, and it is an attack that is occurring on our own soil. The ACLU and its minions, with the help of activist judges, seek to destroy what our Founding Fathers created—One Nation Under God.”

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on Tuesday, introduced legislation in the Senate identical to H. R. 5683.

The ACLU officially opposed H.R. 5683 in a letter to the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the ACLU misstated important facts and misrepresented the law. For example, the ACLU claimed that “service members are unable to choose their symbols when, as in Mt. Soledad, the government erects a 43-foot Latin cross upon public property.” In fact, the memorial cross was erected by a private organization and many family members, friends, and comrades of our fallen veterans have chosen to honor their fallen heroes by placing nearly 2,000 memorial plaques at the foot of the cross. Many of the plaques contain the Star of David, honoring fallen Jewish veterans.

Moreover, the ACLU also made the specious claim that “Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Scalia, and Justice White joined Justice Kennedy in noting that Latin crosses on government property violate the Constitution.” In support of this prevarication, the ACLU cited dicta from a dissent written by Justice Kennedy in which he hypothetically claimed that the Establishment Clause would forbid “a city to permit the permanent erection of a large Latin cross on the roof of city hall.” The ACLU failed to mention that Justice Kennedy was dissenting from a decision in which liberal members of the Court held that it was unconstitutional for the government to display a Nativity scene at a county courthouse. In his dissent, Justice Kennedy stated that the ACLU-backed decision to remove the Nativity “reflects an unjustified hostility toward religion, a hostility inconsistent with our history and our precedents.” Furthermore, it was Justice Kennedy who recently issued the stay to prevent the removal of the memorial cross until all of the legal appeals had been exhausted.

Robert Muise, a trial attorney for the Law Center working on this case, commented, “Any first-year law student knows that dicta is not the law, particularly dicta from a dissenting opinion that does not directly address the legal issue at stake. The ACLU’s misrepresentations may work on activist judges, but they are not fooling the American public or Congress. This case is plainly exposing the ACLU’s anti-Christian agenda.”

President Bush Supports Cross: House Passes Bill To Preserve It; Senate Bill Introduced-ACLU Continues Its Campaign to Stop It

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Bill to protect the Mt. Soledad memorial cross, H. R. 5863, overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 349-74. The Bill transfers possession of the veterans memorial in San Diego, California to the federal government. The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, worked closely with Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), the main sponsor of the Bill, on the language of the legislation.

Over the last two years, the Law Center has been working tirelessly to preserve the veterans memorial from the attack of ACLU-backed atheist Philip Paulson, who filed a lawsuit in 1989 to remove the memorial cross. In addition to supporting this bill, the Law Center is directly involved in both state court and federal court appeals on behalf of San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, the organization that played a major role in the hugely successful petition drive to transfer the land on which the memorial sits to the federal government.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commended a number of organizations that have joined the fight to keep the memorial cross, including the American Legion Department of California, represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, the American Center for Law and Justice, which filed an amicus brief on behalf of several Congressmen, and the American Family Association.

Commented Thompson, “The overwhelming support for this bill demonstrates that the ACLU and the liberal judges who support the ACLU’s anti-Christian agenda are out of touch with America. No doubt, the ACLU will return to its liberal judges to try to undo, once again, the democratic process and the will of the people. However, an effective coalition of veterans groups, political leaders, and public interest organizations is developing to stop them.”

President Bush, on the day of the vote, issued a “Statement of Administration Policy” that “strongly” supported H.R. 5683. The Statement read, in part, “In the face of legal action threatening the continued existence of the current Memorial, the people of San Diego have clearly expressed their desire to keep the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in its present form. Judicial activism should not stand in the way of the people, and the Administration commends Rep. Hunter for his efforts in introducing this bill.”

Over the past two years, the Law Center has provided thousands of attorney hours without charge to preserve the memorial cross from destruction by the ACLU-backed atheist Paulson. Charles LiMandri, the west coast director of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “This case is one that should concern all Americans. It is a direct attack on our national heritage, and it is an attack that is occurring on our own soil. The ACLU and its minions, with the help of activist judges, seek to destroy what our Founding Fathers created—One Nation Under God.”

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on Tuesday, introduced legislation in the Senate identical to H. R. 5683.

The ACLU officially opposed H.R. 5683 in a letter to the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the ACLU misstated important facts and misrepresented the law. For example, the ACLU claimed that “service members are unable to choose their symbols when, as in Mt. Soledad, the government erects a 43-foot Latin cross upon public property.” In fact, the memorial cross was erected by a private organization and many family members, friends, and comrades of our fallen veterans have chosen to honor their fallen heroes by placing nearly 2,000 memorial plaques at the foot of the cross. Many of the plaques contain the Star of David, honoring fallen Jewish veterans.

Moreover, the ACLU also made the specious claim that “Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Scalia, and Justice White joined Justice Kennedy in noting that Latin crosses on government property violate the Constitution.” In support of this prevarication, the ACLU cited dicta from a dissent written by Justice Kennedy in which he hypothetically claimed that the Establishment Clause would forbid “a city to permit the permanent erection of a large Latin cross on the roof of city hall.” The ACLU failed to mention that Justice Kennedy was dissenting from a decision in which liberal members of the Court held that it was unconstitutional for the government to display a Nativity scene at a county courthouse. In his dissent, Justice Kennedy stated that the ACLU-backed decision to remove the Nativity “reflects an unjustified hostility toward religion, a hostility inconsistent with our history and our precedents.” Furthermore, it was Justice Kennedy who recently issued the stay to prevent the removal of the memorial cross until all of the legal appeals had been exhausted.

Robert Muise, a trial attorney for the Law Center working on this case, commented, “Any first-year law student knows that dicta is not the law, particularly dicta from a dissenting opinion that does not directly address the legal issue at stake. The ACLU’s misrepresentations may work on activist judges, but they are not fooling the American public or Congress. This case is plainly exposing the ACLU’s anti-Christian agenda.”

House passes Mount Hood bill
Blumenauer and Walden prod Senate to adopt the measure

The U.S. House of Representatives voted Monday to pass the Mount Hood Stewardship Legacy Act, and its Oregon sponsors urged the Senate to do the same immediately.

U.S. Reps. Earl Blumenauer, D-Portland, and Greg Walden, R-Hood River, gave a summary of their bill – which would designate more than 77,000 acres of land around Mount Hood as wilderness and institute a number of stewardship measures – and received a quick approval from the House membership.

The bill was passed using a congressional provision known as Suspension of the Rules, which allows a maximum 40-minute debate on a piece of legislation, prohibits amendments and requires a 2/3 majority for passage.

Madeleine Bordallo – the Democratic delegate from Guam – threw her support to the bill.

“This is one of the most important days in the modern history of Mount Hood,” Blumenauer said before the vote. He urged his colleagues in the Senate to act quickly.

“I hope our friends in the other body will seize the day,” Blumenauer said. “If they choose to act this week, the President can sign it before Labor Day.”

With as little as six weeks left in the current Congress, the wilderness bill faces the possibility of dying at the end of the year. If the Senate doesn’t put forward and approve a similar or reconciled bill before the end of the year, both legislative bodies would have to reintroduce the Act to the new Congress at the beginning of the year.

U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden, a Democrat, and Gordon Smith, a Republican, have indicated that they will not adopt the Blumenauer-Walden bill for the Senate, but instead are working on their own bill. The senators have repeatedly said they will not set a timeline for presenting their legislative package.

Despite the potential delay, Blumenauer staffer Kathie Eastman says the congressmen are confident that if they had to reintroduce the bill in January, it would easily pass again. But right now, “the House side is ready to go,” she said.

ADF: American Legion Files Amicus Brief In 9th Cir. Mt. Soledad Case

In a joint press release today, California Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer issued support for the San Diego Mt. Soledad Cross and urged the Senate to pass an upcoming vote which would transfer the land the cross sits on to the federal government, protecting it from further threats of removal by the ACLU.

From ADF Press Release:

Seeking to prevent the removal of the 52-year-old Mount Soledad cross from atop a war memorial, the Alliance Defense Fund, representing The American Legion Department of California, and Liberty Legal Institute, representing the national American Legion, have filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

“The cross is universally recognized as a way to honor those who have fallen, both military and civilian members of society,” said ADF Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot. “Not only did the cross stand unchallenged for 35 years, the citizens of San Diego chose to reaffirm their support for it in a landslide vote last year. It should not to be torn down after more than a half century to satisfy one person’s agenda.”

In 2005, 75 percent of San Diegans voted to preserve the Mount Soledad cross by transferring it from city property to the ownership of the National Park Service.

Earlier this month, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued a stay in favor of Mount Soledad supporters, allowing the cross to remain until a final outcome is determined in the ongoing litigation surrounding the cross (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3790). On May 3, a federal district judge had ordered the cross to be removed within 90 days, saying that the city would be subjected to a $5,000 per day fine for every day it continued to stand beyond the deadline.

A copy of the brief filed in Paulson v. City of San Diego can be read at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/Paulson.pdf.

“Clearly, the overwhelming majority of San Diegans both support and welcome the cross,” Theriot said. “Just as thousands of crosses in Arlington Cemetery, including the Argonne Cross, stand on public ground to honor our war dead, so does the cross at Mount Soledad. Despite the best efforts of a lone atheist, nothing is wrong or unconstitutional about allowing the cross to stand for this purpose. Historically, crosses have been used in this country and through out the world to memorialize those who made the ultimate sacrifice for something greater than themselves.”

I mentioned earlier about a bill that passed the House and is still up for vote in the Senate that is seeking for the government to aquire the land under eminent domain in order to preserve the cross and what it stands for. Most sources I have spoke to are optimistic that this will pass. Contact your Congress critter and tell them to save Mt. Soledad. Until then the work goes on tirelessly from great organizations like Thomas More Law Center and the ADF.

Senate Passes Legislation To Protect Mt. Soledad Cross

With a speed and decisiveness that surprised some, the Senate on Tuesday approved a plan to transfer the land beneath the Mount Soledad war memorial to federal control in an effort to avoid a court-ordered removal of the cross that stands there.

The Senate’s unanimous vote sent the cross-transfer plan to President Bush for his expected signature. It creates what some consider an entirely new dynamic in the 17-year effort to save the cross, but which others say is a hopeless attempt to preserve a symbol on city land that courts have said unconstitutionally favors one religion over others.

“Obviously we’re delighted,” said Charles LiMandri, an attorney advising a group of Soledad cross supporters. “I think even the more liberal side of the Democratic party has to recognize that there is widespread, grassroots support for preserving veterans memorials in general, and the Soledad cross in particular.”

Once this is signed by the President, which will no doubt happen, it will moot all current court battles by making it a Federal issue instead of a State one. Do not doubt the ACLU will challenge this legislation as unconstitutional. They don’t know when to stop. They will find a way to waste more tax dollars to push their agenda of destroying this veteran’s memorial despite the fact that 76% of San Diego voters want to keep the cross. It is a very significant victory for the First Amendment. Got to let out a good celebration on this news! Woo hoo!

Senate votes to put Mount Soledad cross in federal hands

WASHINGTON – With a speed and decisiveness that surprised some, the Senate on Tuesday approved a plan to transfer the land beneath the Mount Soledad war memorial to federal control in an effort to avoid a court-ordered removal of the cross that stands there.

The Senate's unanimous vote sent the cross-transfer plan to President Bush for his expected signature. It creates what some consider an entirely new dynamic in the 17-year effort to save the cross, but which others say is a hopeless attempt to preserve a symbol on city land that courts have said unconstitutionally favors one religion over others.

“Obviously we're delighted,” said Charles LiMandri, an attorney advising a group of Soledad cross supporters. “I think even the more liberal side of the Democratic party has to recognize that there is widespread, grassroots support for preserving veterans memorials in general, and the Soledad cross in particular.”

James McElroy, the attorney representing atheist Philip Paulson – who first sued to remove the cross on the grounds it amounts to an unconstitutional preference of the Christian religion over others – said the bill is “still unconstitutional.”

“I guess the Senate has a short memory,” he said. “You've got a local issue here. What business does the federal government have getting involved?”

The legislation would preserve the 29-foot-tall cross on Mount Soledad by vesting title to the memorial in the federal government and having the Secretary of Defense administer it. The Department of Defense would manage the monument. The Mount Soledad Memorial Association, a private group that built the current cross in 1954 to honor Korean War veterans, would continue to maintain the site.

“Today's vote represents a significant step forward,” said El Cajon Rep. Duncan Hunter, the Republican who joined his two GOP colleagues from San Diego to write the cross-transfer legislation, which passed the House late last month. “The action taken by both the House and Senate reaffirm the overwhelming desire of the San Diego community to keep the memorial exactly where it has proudly stood for over 50 years.”

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, who has fought to keep the cross atop 800-foot-high Mount Soledad, said through spokesman Fred Sainz that he was grateful for “the resonance” with which the Senate spoke on the issue.

“I think that the Senate was able to put political correctness aside for a moment and understand this truly is a war memorial,” Sainz said. “The fact there that a cross is part of it is an issue that senators of all religious faiths were able to come to terms with and accept.”

In July the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked a lower court order forcing the city to remove the cross by yesterday (Aug.1) on grounds it violated the state constitution's ban on government support of religion.

The deadline was set by U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr., who first ordered the cross removed in 1991. It would have imposed a $5,000-a-day fine for failing to comply.

Senate approval came less than two weeks after the House voted 349-74 on July 19 to seize the land and give it to the Defense Department. After some brief wrangling among senators over who would carry the Hunter legislation through the upper chamber, the bill was placed on a so-called “consent calendar,” which indicated it had little opposition. “It's a hot potato, and I suspect the Senate would just as soon pass it and get it to the president and let the courts deal with it,” said Charlie Berwanger, attorney for the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, which has fought to keep the cross where it is.

McElroy said he didn't expect California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, to embrace the measure as they did.

“I didn't expect them to go with this fad,” McElroy said. “But this has become good fodder for politicians in an election year.”

Feinstein and Boxer tend to be staunch church-state separation advocates. But both also support a plan to spend federal money to preserve California missions that hold church services because, the senators argue, the missions have historical significance.

“The Mount Soledad cross has been a great source of hope and inspiration for decades, and it has important historical significance to veterans and San Diegans alike,” Feinstein said.

Boxer said, “I believe this monument to be a memorial to our veterans, and therefore should be allowed to stay. The Hunter bill was drafted in a way that is consistent with the latest court action.”

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also supported the Senate action, saying that “allowing this landmark to be destroyed would send the wrong message to our nation's veterans.” Should the Mount Soledad cross end up in federal hands, its future likely will rest on interpretations of the federal Constitution, not California's. Cross supporters say the courts have been more willing to allow religious symbols on public land on federal constitutional grounds, particularly if the symbol has historic or cultural significance.

Last year, a pair of 5-4 rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court in separate cases involving the Ten Commandments established fuzzy guidelines: The court found that a display inside a Kentucky courthouse was unconstitutional, but that a 6-foot granite monument outside the Texas Capitol was all right.

“The time may be ripe for the court to revisit the issue,” said LiMandri. “They'll take this case because the law needs clarity.”

Cross foes note that the courts have ordered the removal of other crosses based on federal constitutional grounds. Five years ago, the American Civil Liberties Union successfully sued to remove a 5-foot-tall cross of metal tubing in the Mojave National Preserve, although the removal is on appeal.

“I don't think the Supreme Court is going to rewrite the Constitution or the last 50 years of precedent,” McElroy said. “This is not like the Ten Commandments cases. The Latin cross is a powerful symbol of religion.”

For now, congressional action does not interfere with various lawsuits being pursued in state and federal courts.

In state court, cross supporters are appealing a decision by a Superior Court judge that invalidated Proposition A, a measure approved last fall by 76 percent of San Diego voters that would have donated the cross to the federal government, but which the judge said violated the state Constitution.

In federal court, the city is appealing Thompson's order to remove the cross or be fined. That case is to be heard in October.

Senate gives Bush bill to save cross
Passes proposal enabling feds to acquire Mt. Soledad land

It's been called a "red flag waved in front of a bull" to those who want to strip America of its Christian heritage, but a memorial that honors United States' war veterans with a cross is another step closer to protection.

The U.S. Senate unanimously passed legislation yesterday that would provide for the federal government to acquire the site of the Mt.Soledad Veterans Memorial and preserve it.

It was a "great victory" for veterans, Richard Thompson, chief counsel for the Thomas More Law Center, said today.

But he warned the fight, which already has lasted 17 years, isn't over.

"The presence of the cross atop Mt. Soledad enrages the ACLU much like a red flag waved in front of a bull," he said.

The U.S. Supreme Court just last month intervened in the disagreement to stay a lower court's order that the city either remove the cross by Tuesday, or face fines of $5,000 per day.

The legislation is "strongly" supported by President Bush.

"In the face of legal action threatening the continued existence of the current memorial, the people of San Diego have clearly expressed their desire to keep the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in its present form," said a recent administration policy statement obtained by WorldNetDaily.

"The administration supports the important goal of preserving the integrity of war memorials," the statement said.

The legislative plan would protect the 29-foot concrete cross atop Mt. Soledad that was targeted in a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union after an atheist alleged it violated his belief that historic religious emblems couldn't be displayed on public property.

The legislation is a second front to the effort to preserve the honor to this nation's fallen heroes. The court battle continues, with oral arguments on the issue scheduled for the week of Oct. 16. Earlier, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the most overturned appellate court in the federal judiciary, refused to stay a lower court order.

That order from District Judge Gordon Thompson concluded the cross is unconstitutional, and he had imposed the Tuesday deadline.

The U.S. House earlier had approved the same legislation, allowing the Senate approval to send the issue to the president.

"The congressional action underscores what most Americans understand – that the Mt. Soledad cross poses no constitutional crisis in honoring our war heroes," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel with the American Center for Law and Justice.

The ACLJ represents a number of members of Congress, including Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who sponsored the House measure protecting the cross.

The More Center, like the ACLJ a public interest law firm, has been involved in the defense of the memorial for several years already and expects there will be more work.

"The plaintiff and ACLU have already demonstrated their persistence and zeal to take down the cross and this political defeat will most likely intensify their legal efforts as they sense what they thought was sure victory slipping through their fingers," Thompson said.

The issue had been resolved at one point in 2004, with Congress providing for a way for the land to be donated to the Department of the Interior and administered under the National Park System.

However, the San Diego City Council refused to make the donation, triggering the organization of San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, whose members concluded the cross is a "national treasure." They collected more than 100,000 signatures calling on the council to reverse its decision.

A subsequent special election on the issue resulted in 76 percent of the voters deciding to preserve the cross, which is surrounded by six walls holding 3,200 black granite plaques honoring veterans from all military branches.

Mt. Soledad Cross's Victory in Congress Won't End Court Battles, Supporters Say

(AgapePress) - Conservative political leaders and pro-family advocates are applauding the U.S. Senate's swift, unanimous passage last night of the Bill to Preserve the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial. Strongly opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the legislation provides for the federal government's immediate acquisition of the embattled San Diego veterans memorial, which features a 29-foot-tall cross.

The concrete cross, which stands 43 feet tall if one includes the height of its base, is the centerpiece of a commemorative monument that includes more than 1,700 granite plaques honoring fallen U.S. military veterans from the Civil War to the Korean War, to the current war in Iraq. But the cross is also at the center of a 17-year legal battle between an atheist, supported by the ACLU, and San Diego, supported by numerous veterans and people of faith, over the so-called separation of church and state.

The bill to transfer the cross to federal land was first introduced in the House of Representatives by Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter of California. The House overwhelmingly passed it in a 349-74 vote on July 19 and sent it to the Senate on July 20, where it was introduced by Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama. Senate's unanimous approval moves the legislation to the desk of President Bush, who is expected to sign it.

During his announcement of the bill's passage, Senator Sessions said he was glad to see the Senate join the House in approving a bill "that will put an end to the litigation under the California Constitution by transferring the memorial to the federal government." However, he lamented the fact that this embattled monument has "sadly come under attack by the ACLU because it contains a cross commemorating fallen soldiers."

Sessions went on to point out that America "has a long history and tradition of memorializing members of the armed forces who die in battle with a cross or other religious emblems of faith." The Alabama lawmaker said he is glad Congress has "stepped up" to help ensure that the Mount Soledad memorial remains "as a tribute to those who sacrificed their lives in defense of their country."

Congressman Duncan Hunter, who joined two GOP colleagues from San Diego County in writing the House version of the cross-transfer bill, called its bicameral passage "a significant step forward," Copley News Service reports. Hunter said the August 2 vote "reaffirms the overwhelming desire" of San Diego citizens to keep the memorial "exactly where it has proudly stood for over 50 years."

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger also expressed support for the cross-transfer legislation. After the bill's passage, he remarked that allowing the Mount Soledad memorial to be destroyed would "send the wrong message to our nation's veterans."

The Cross in Court: A Long Battle That Isn't Over
A federal judge ruled last May that since the controversial Mount Soledad cross is on city land, the memorial violates the California Constitution's ban on government endorsement of any one religion. The City of San Diego has been ordered to remove the religious symbol or be fined $5,000 a day. However, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has issued an indefinite stay to put off any fines against the city until the matter has gone through the entire judicial process.

Supporters of the cross believe the legislation allowing for transfer of the memorial to the federal government will help their case and will protect the cross from further court challenges, as religious displays can legally occupy federal land if they have a secular meaning. Once the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial is officially on federal land, their hope is that it will no longer be susceptible to continued litigation under California's Constitution.

Richard Thompson is President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, one of a number of organizations that have joined in the fight to save the cross. He is calling the passage of the Bill to Preserve the Mount Soledad Cross a "great victory for our veterans and our fallen war heroes" and says he applauds Senator Sessions for keeping the pressure on to move it through Senate.

However, Thompson says it would be a "serious mistake" to think the fight is over." He observes that the plaintiff and the ACLU have already shown "persistence and zeal" in their efforts against the cross, and "this political defeat will most likely intensify their legal efforts," not unlike "a red flag waved in front of a bull."

Thomas More Law Center's West Coast Director, San Diego attorney Charles LiMandri, has spearheaded the legal defense of the cross. He was quoted as saying he and other supporters are obviously "delighted" with the passage of the bill. However, he agrees with Thompson that this legislative win will not mean the end of the judicial struggle over the monument.
Coalition of Cross Supporters Continues the Fight
"Legal attacks on the Mount Soledad cross will continue in both the federal and California courts," LiMandri asserts. Still, he adds, "Clearly, Senate passage of this legislation will greatly assist us in these court battles." Fortunately, he notes, many other supporters, including veterans groups, legal and pro-family organizations, and individuals, have been engaged in the fight to preserve the Mount Soledad cross.

The Thomas More Law Center is involved in both the California appellate court and the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial, a group that played a major role in the successful petition drive to transfer the memorial site land to the federal government. However, the Center notes, retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Jeremiah Denton -- a member of the Law Center's Citizens Advisory Board, a former Vietnam P.O.W. and a former U.S. Senator -- also proved instrumental in the effort by obtaining political support for the memorial in Washington.

Along with the Thomas More Law Center, a number of other pro-family groups and legal organizations are involved in the fight to save the cross as well. Among these are the California Department of the American Legion, represented by the Alliance Defense Fund; the American Family Association Center for Law and Policy; and the American Center for Law and Justice, which filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of several members of Congress.

Attorney Sees Tide Turning in Battle to Save Mt. Soledad Cross
But, as Bush Prepares to Sign Land Transfer Bill, Further ACLU Attacks Expected

(AgapePress) - Today President George W. Bush is scheduled to sign a bill intended to protect San Diego's Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial and its embattled cross. The legislation, unanimously approved by the Senate earlier this month and passed in a 349-74 House vote last month, now clears the way for the memorial's transfer of ownership to the federal government.

The 29-foot cross that is the centerpiece of the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial has been the target of church-state separationists for years. Particularly, the religious symbol has been the central figure in a 17-year legal challenge which began with a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of an atheist who feels the veterans memorial should not be located on public property.

Charles LiMandri is with the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, that has been fighting to save the cross and memorial since 2004. He says President Bush's signing of the bill today will effectively nullify a recent court order directing the City of San Diego to remove the cross or else face hefty fines.

"The tide is definitely in our favor," LiMandri asserts. "The existing injunction that was issued should be rendered moot by this new legislation," he says, "and the federal law that is now applicable is definitely more favorable to us."

Also, the attorney points out, "The Justice Department has more resources than the City of San Diego." In other words, compared to the California city, the federal government has deeper coffers and is "in a better position to fight this on behalf of the United States," he explains. But despite the overwhelming support of Congress for the transfer legislation, he and other Thomas More Law Center attorneys fully expect the ACLU to continue its efforts, both in the federal courts and in the California courts, to have the cross removed.

Still, LiMandri says today's signing of the bill to save the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial is a milestone that will be an important legal factor in the continuing court battle over the monument's constitutionality. "And since it now is a case that's going to be decided under federal law, and since there's an act of Congress to back it up, we think there's a very good chance the Supreme Court will take this case," he observes.

"If and when the case gets to the United States Supreme Court, we're very confident we have the votes that we need there to ultimately prevail," the Thomas More Law Center spokesman notes. He says he and other supporters of the Mount Soledad cross are hoping the high court will take up the matter and finally "issue a decision that will be beneficial to all of us who do believe that it's appropriate to honor veterans by using religious symbols such as the cross."

President Bush has invited LiMandri, who spearheaded the legal fight to save the cross, to be present at the White House bill signing ceremony. Richard Thompson, Thomas More Law Center's president and chief counsel, called the invitation a credit to LiMandri's "hard work and dedication" to preserving the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial for future generations.

ACLU files suit to force relocation of Mount Soledad cross

The local chapter of The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit Thursday to force the relocation of the Mount Soledad cross in the latest challenge over the constitutionality of the controversial La Jolla landmark.

The suit, filed in federal court on behalf of a national Jewish war veterans organization and three other San Diego residents, is the latest step in an increasingly high-profile 17-year legal battle over the cross.

On Aug. 14 President Bush signed a bill that transferred the ownership of the cross and war memorial site to the federal government, specifically the Department of Defense.

The bill halted the legal process that seemed destined to lead to the removal of the cross, which has sat on city-owned land for decades.

In May, San Diego federal Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. moved to enforce a decision he handed down in 1991 that the cross had to be removed.

He found it violated the state constitution's ban on government preference for religion. He gave the city 90 days to comply or face $5,000 per day in fines.

That set off a flurry of legal activity which culminated on July 7 when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy blocked Thompson's order – stopping the clock on the city, and allowing time for the congressional bill to move forward.

With the land now belonging to the federal government, the legal battle will be waged under how courts interpret the federal – not state – constitutional prohibition of government support for religion.

Cross supporters contend they have a better chance of winning under that federal analysis. But opponents, including the ACLU, contend that virtually nothing has changed with the handover of land ownership.

“The issue is still the same,” said David Blair-Loy, director for the ACLU in San Diego. “We believe it is equally unconstitutional under state law, or federal law, for the government to subsidize, promote or endorse the Latin cross.”

The ACLU lawsuit joins another challenging the recent land transfer filed Aug. 9 by Philip Paulson, the war veteran and atheist who originally sued in 1989 to get the cross removed.

That lawsuit will argue that the cross not only violates the U.S. Constitution, but also seeks to overturn this summer's congressional action which took control of the property, said James McElroy, Paulson's lawyer.

Both lawsuits will likely be consolidated, but will not be heard by Thompson, who has handled the cross litigation for 17 years. Instead the cases – assigned randomly by a computer – will be heard by Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz.

The lawyer for a group trying to preserve the cross predicted that the new lawsuits will fail.

“We just believe whatever arguments they have will be properly dispatched, and we will prevail,” said Charles LiMandri of the San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial.

The group is not named in the ACLU suit but LiMandri said they will join with the government to defend it.

These new developments come while two other legal actions in state and federal courts – both of which were in the works before the federal government took the land – are still pending.

But given the changed circumstances in the cross controversy, they may never be heard.

The city and LiMandri's group are appealing a ruling by a San Diego Superior Court judge which invalidated Proposition A. That measure, approved by voters last fall, would have allowed the city to transfer the property to the federal government.

The judge ruled the transfer showed an unconstitutional preference for religion under state law.

But now that the land is federal property by congressional, and not city, action, the issues in the case may be moot. LiMandri said his group will file papers dropping their role in the appeal next week.

McElroy said he has had informal discussions with city lawyers that they may also abandon that appeal.

“It really doesn't get them anywhere, and it is costing them money,” he said.

But Deputy City Attorney David Carlin said no decisions on what to do have been made. Any final decision would have to be made by the city council, which is on recess until Sept. 6.

A similar fate may befall the appeal in federal court. There, the city had tried to overturn Thompson's ruling in May to take the cross down within 90 days, contending it was an abuse of his judicial discretion.

With the cross no longer on city land, that appeal might also be irrelevant, said McElroy, and the city may also consider dropping it.

But Carlin said no decision on how to proceed on either case has been made. The city has another option aside from dropping the appeals. It could ask they be put on hold pending the outcome of the latest suits, said Carlin.

A decision would have to be made soon. Both cases are set for oral arguments in October.

Target: Mt. Soledad Memorial — ACLU keeps the wrecking ball on call

The ACLU today filed a federal lawsuit in its latest attempt to drive all reference to faith from the public square. In what is a smart PR move on the ACLU’s part, they’ve brought a group called the Jewish War Veterans on as a plaintiff along with “local residents.” So what was once a case that pitted a lone rabid atheist gadfly against an entire city and the largest veterans organization in the country…and oh, yeah the fallen heroes that the memorial was erected to honor…the ACLU has done what it does best and turned it into inter-faith strife, as if only Christians support the Mt. Soledad memorial cross. They’ve also decided to ask that it be moved, instead of turned into rubble. The new strategy though is still the same old story cloaked in what the ACLU thinks a bit less rancid to the taste buds. A passive display that has stood for decades, that doesn’t to my knowledge possess super-secret conversion lasers that force people to worship and certainly doesn’t qualify as a law passed by Congress to establish a state religion…no matter, it needs to go and the ACLU will fight from the dawn of the first Bush Administration until Bush II is back on the ranch. This case is one of the more infuriating examples of the ACLU’s pathological hostility to anything that references Christianity.

From the ACLU: ACLU Represents Jewish War Veterans and San Diego Residents in Effort to Relocate Mt. Soledad Memorial

SAN DIEGO – The American Civil Liberties Union, the Jewish War Veterans and local residents announced today that they are suing the U.S. government and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, charging that the continued display of the Mt. Soledad Latin cross on federally owned land unlawfully entangles government with religion.

“The ACLU believes that religious symbols, even prominently displayed, are an important and constitutionally protected form of religious expression in the public sphere,” said David Blair-Loy, Legal Director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties. “There is a huge difference between families and religious communities expressing their religious beliefs and the U.S. government—using all of its power, authority, financing, and property—to promote the beliefs of one faith over all others.”

The ACLU has sued to remove even completely privately-funded and maintained monuments all across the country (they just got smoked in Green v. Haskell last week). The ACLU has sued to remove privately placed crèches from public grounds where an open forum existed (Cranston, RI), appealing the case all the way to the 1st Circuit. The ACLU is currently threatening to sue a Louisiana Parish should a volunteer group go ahead and erect a privately-funded memorial to Katrina victims on private land because it will include a cross (Joe Cook says that because some people whose day job is public employment and that the memorial will be NEAR public land that it is “unconstitutional). The list goes on folks. It’s important to note that there have been several attempts to turn the land on which the memorial sits over to the private organization that already maintains it, but all have been blocked by the ACLU’s legal actions. More importantly, the city originally granted a private organization permission to erect this cross on behalf of families of troops killed in Korea. So the only “entanglement” is the fact that this cross stands on ground the ACLU has refused to allow to be transferred to private hands.

“The federal acquisition of the Latin cross does nothing to cure the ongoing constitutional violation,” said Daniel Mach, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “When any government entity—federal, state, or local—uses taxpayer funds to acquire and prominently display a religious symbol that is sacred to some, but not all religious believers, it disregards the rich religious diversity in our society.”

The only taxpayer funds being drained presently are being used to fight this suit!

“Veterans of all faiths have served and died, and continue to serve and die in the war against terrorism, to uphold the tenets of our Constitution and keep our communities of faith safe from government interference. It is an affront to non-Christian veterans for their service to be commemorated by a cross,” said Norman Rosenshein, National Commander of the JWV. “We condemn this property transfer as an election-year attempt to circumvent previous rulings and feel confident that future judicial rulings will deem the cross to be unconstitutional.”

Nice ACLU talking points. Not one family whose fallen family member is commemorated by this memorial has come forward to say that this is an “affront.” “Election-year attempt????” The judge in May ordered that the cross be torn down Aug. 1st! So the supporters of the memorial (probably 80% of the country) should have rolled over just because an election is coming in Nov.? Idiotic.

The group’s members include individuals based in the San Diego area who regularly view the Latin cross on Mt. Soledad and who are offended by the government’s communication of favoritism and endorsement of the majority faith at the expense of citizens and veterans of other faiths who died in the service of their country.

More idiocy. This memorial was not erected with the intent to dishonor certain service members, but to honor them all. There’s been nothing done at anyone’s “expense.” The dishonorable part of this whole thing is that there are bigots trying to tear this symbol down for what? It “offends” them? Tiny, tiny violin.

The Mount Soledad cross has long served as the site for Christian religious observances. When the current cross was formally installed on Easter Sunday, 1954, it was dedicated to “Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” No plaques recognizing veterans were installed until decades later, in 1992, several years after a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the cross was filed. Subsequent granite walls with individual veterans’ plaques, and an American flag, were not added until the year 2000.

I don’t have a shovel big enough to clear this steaming pile. Photos of the dedication ceremony CLEARLY show that this cross was dedicated in honor of fallen troops. Families of those who were being honored were present, a Marine Color guard is present and one Marine is playing “Taps,” which is played why? Anyone? Yeah, to honor fallen brethren. So what if the cross was the only element of the monument at one time? The intent was always clear — not to establish Christianity as a national religion, but to honor the kind of sacrifice that the ACLU would never make, but certainly takes advantage of.

No matter what the ACLU says, the US Constitution doesn’t demand that all religious symbols, even if they are associated with a particular faith, be removed from public land.

Court Arguments This Week Focus on Destiny of Mt. Soledad Cross

(AgapePress) - The battle for the fate of the Mt. Soledad cross veterans memorial continues this week with two key oral arguments in state and federal courts in California concerning the San Diego monument. The cases involve a challenge to the city's attempts to federalize the memorial, and a judge's previous order to take the cross down.

Thomas More Law Center attorney Charles LiMandri argued Tuesday in California's Fourth District Court of Appeals on behalf of San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial, a local group trying to save the cross through a ballot initiative that transferred it to the federal government. The legality of that action was in question in the case.

"Even with the transfer to the federal government under the new statute, there are issues that overlap with the prior statute that [the judge] ruled, the Proposition A, all constitutional -- which was basically a gift of the property, a donation from the City of San Diego to the federal government," the attorney explains. "[The judge] says you can't do that, but there's issues that are similar with the new federal statute which constituted an actual taking of the property."

LiMandri indicates that he feels good about how the court will respond. "We think this court's going to go ahead and issue a decision, and from the way the questioning went today, we're very encouraged by it," says LiMandri. "And we're optimistic that the court understood the issues -- and because they understood the issues, [that they] are likely to go our way in deciding the case."

LiMandri's colleague, Thomas Muise, is representing the same San Diego group today (Thursday, October 19) before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a case in which a federal district judge's May 2006 order to remove the cross was stayed by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. Muise, who -- like LiMandri -- is optimistic about the ultimate outcome in the matter, says veterans and their families have a big stake in the fate of this 17-year battle for the life of the Mt. Soledad cross.

"The stay by Justice Kennedy and the recent Act of Congress are significant factors that have shifted the momentum of this case in favor of preserving the memorial cross," Muise states in a press release. "We are hopeful that this Ninth Circuit panel will preserve this historical war memorial for future generations of Americans. Our fallen heroes have earned it."

According to the press release, Muise will argue for the case to be dismissed based on "mootness grounds." President Bush's mid-August signing of a congressional act immediately transferred all title and interest in the cross and memorial to the federal government. As of that date, says the Law Center, the city of San Diego no longer owns the property where the memorial sits -- thereby making the lower court's injunction no longer enforceable.

Atheist who fought Mount Soledad cross dies at 59
Philip Paulson conducted 17-year legal battle to remove symbol from public property

Philip Kevin Paulson, who fought a 17-year legal battle to remove the Mount Soledad cross from public property, died Wednesday of liver cancer. He was 59.

Paulson, a 6-foot-5 Vietnam veteran who lived in City Heights, became so passionate about the separation of church and state that he filed a civil lawsuit against the city of San Diego in 1989 without an attorney. He won the case, and as the appeals dragged on he became one of the county's most reviled and respected characters.

During interviews with The San Diego Union-Tribune in September and October, a few months after doctors told him he did not have long to live, Paulson said he was unconcerned about death and proud of the stand that defined his life.

“The real message is equal treatment under the law, and religious neutrality. That's the purpose of why I did it,” said Paulson, who turned away from religion early in life. “It has nothing to do with me being an atheist or whether I was a Bible-thumping fundamentalist Baptist preacher.”

Paulson, the grandson of a Lutheran preacher who shunned media attention to protect the case, agreed to exclusive interviews on the condition that his comments remain confidential until his death or the end of the case.

He said he wanted people to understand why he pursued the removal of the cross, and that he was never motivated by a hatred of Christians.

“I don't harbor those kind of feelings,” Paulson said. “My mother's a Christian. I was raised a devout Christian. I'm not anti-Christian. The reason I did it is because it's not fair to the other religions. America is not just the Christian religion.”

Paulson, who grew up in Clayton, Wis., a town of 300 people, taught computer and business classes at National University.

When it became clear last summer that Paulson's condition was terminal, he and his lawyer, James McElroy, made plans to add another plaintiff to the case so that it could continue. The city has agreed to the move, although the change awaits the judge's signature. The new plaintiff, Steve Trunk, is a Vietnam war veteran, an atheist and also the product of a religious upbringing.

The city has argued that while the cross has religious significance, it also has a secular purpose – to honor war veterans. Paulson contended the memorial portion of the hilltop site was built only after he filed suit. The cross is a religious symbol that should be moved from public land, Paulson contended.

President Bush signed a bill this year that transferred ownership of the cross and war memorial site to the Department of Defense.

Lawyers urge court to finish 17-year-old Mt. Soledad case
Argue that claim is moot because San Diego no longer owns land

There is no decision left to make in a 17-year-long claim against San Diego over the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in California, two law firms have told a federal appeals court, because the city cannot do anything now anyway because the federal government owns the property.

Firms representing dozens of members of Congress and hundreds of thousands of other Americans have filed briefs with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals over the dispute that has gone on so long the original plaintiff cited by the American Civil Liberties Union as an injured party has died.

Oral arguments were held by the court several weeks ago, and it followed with an order for the law firms to file briefs regarding the mootness of the case. Answering that call were lawyers for the Thomas More Law Center and the American Center for Law and Justice.

Earlier this year, Congress approved and President Bush signed legislation giving ownership and control of the memorial to the federal government. It had been under the jurisdiction of the city of San Diego earlier. That's why the city was named as a defendant when people alleged their rights were violated by the existence of the cross.

The lawsuit against the city over the memorial's cross had reached the 9th Circuit before the congressional action, and the lawyers now are arguing that the case, essentially, is over.

The ACLJ's amicus brief on behalf of 22 members of Congress said there's nothing left to decide.

"This is an important opportunity to bring to end to one of the legal challenges aimed at removing the Mount Soledad Memorial," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the ACLJ. "There is simply no reason for this case to proceed since the federal government lawfully took ownership of the land on which the memorial sits.

"While there are other legal challenges that continue to move forward, we are hopeful the federal appeals court will dismiss this litigation against the city of San Diego. At the end of the day, we're confident all legal challenges to the Mt. Soledad Memorial will fail and a cross that's been in place for more than half a century will remain in place for years to come," Sekulow said.

There still are two pending claims, one in state courts and the other in federal courts against the federal government, over the memorial, the ACLJ noted.

The August law transferred all control to the federal government, so any claims against the city are moot, the legal team argued on behalf of California Congressman Duncan Hunter and other members of Congress including Todd Akin, Gresham Barrett, Eric Cantor, Michael Conaway, Barbara Cubin, John Culberson, Phil Gingery, Gil Gutknecht, Jack Kingston, John Kline, Kenny Marchant, Patrick McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Gary Miller, Marilyn Musgrave, Randy Neugebauer, Joseph Pitts, Jim Ryun, Todd Tiahrt, Dave Weldon and Lynn Westmoreland.

More than 170,000 people also have signed the ACLJ's petition to preserve the memorial.

In response to the order from the 9th Circuit Court, the Thomas More Law Center filed a brief detailing the reasons the case should be dismissed.

"The Court's recent order requesting additional briefing of mootness is good news – it shows that the court is focusing on the proper issue. As we demonstrated during oral argument and in our most recent filing, the Constitution requires the Court to dismiss this case because it lacks jurisdiction to enforce the 1991 injunction ordering the City to remove the memorial cross on state constitutional grounds – the City is no longer responsible for the cross, which now rests of federal land, and the California Constitution is inapplicable as a result," the law center said.

Court rules against ACLU, atheist on San Diego cross
Judges say voter measure transferring land to federal government constitutional

In a major victory for backers of San Diego's Mt. Soledad cross, an appeals court ruled today in favor of a voter measure that authorized transfer of the land beneath the memorial to the federal government.

A panel of justices from the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled 3-0 that Proposition A was constitutional, overturning 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 last month.

"We are quite pleased with the court's decision," said Charles LiMandri, the West Coast Regional Director for the Thomas More Law Center, which argued the case. "It protects the will of the people and their desire to preserve a historical, veterans memorial for future generations."

The battle began in 1989 when Paulsen filed suit, and a court ordered the city to remove the cross. 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.

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.

The ballot initiative came about after the city refused to donate the cross and memorial to the federal government. A group called San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial took just 23 days to gather 105,000 signatures.

Paulson had argued against the validity of Proposition A, contending it violated the state constitutional ban on government aid or preference to religion.

But the justices today decided the voter initiative not an establishment of religion by San Diego voters.

"Given the language of Proposition A and the official ballot argument in favor of the proposition, we cannot conclude the individuals who voted for the proposition acted in order to establish the Christian religion or favor that religion," wrote Associate Justice Patricia Benke.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which is defending the constitutionality of the cross, said the decision "clearly shows that the ballot proposition was proper."

"This decision represents another important legal victory in the ongoing battle to keep the Mt. Soledad Memorial in place," he said.

9th Circuit decides order to tear down Mt. Soledad cross must be vacated

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled today that a 17-year lawsuit seeking the removal of the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial cross is now moot. The court said a district court order requiring the removal of the cross must be vacated. The Alliance Defense Fund and Liberty Legal Institute filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case Nov. 22 on behalf of The American Legion and The American Legion Department of California, asking the court to dismiss the suit.

“Memorials like the one at Mt. Soledad are a tribute to our nation’s veterans. At long last, this part of the crusade against a memorial beloved by them and their families is finally over,” said ADF Legal Counsel Tim Chandler. “Now that the cross is clearly under federal control, the 9th Circuit agreed that, with regard to this lawsuit, it was time to end the ACLU’s protracted legal attack on this symbol dedicated to our nation’s fallen heroes.”

ADF and LLI attorneys filed their friend-of-the-court brief shortly after President Bush signed the law that officially transferred ownership of the memorial property to the federal government.

The cross has been in existence since 1952. In 2005, 76 percent of San Diegans voted to preserve the Mount Soledad cross by transferring the memorial from city property to the ownership of the National Park Service, but that move was contested in court.

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

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.

"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.

Mt. Soledad case 'should be put to rest'
ACLJ argues more appeals in dispute over San Diego cross unneeded

A brief has been filed with the California Supreme Court on behalf of nearly two dozens members of Congress asking that a lower court ruling in the dispute over the Mt. Soledad Memorial be affirmed.

That lower court decision concluded that a ballot proposition in which San Diego voters overwhelmingly supported a plan to donate the memorial and its land to the federal government was constitutional.

The new filing comes from the American Center for Law and Justice, which wants the state Supreme Court to deny a further review of the dispute and allow the cross memorial to stay where it is.

The ACLJ's filing come just a few weeks after a federal appeals court dismissed a separate legal proceeding that challenged the cross memorial.

"The state appeals court got this right and there is simply no reason for the California Supreme Court to take this appeal," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, which is active in defending the constitutionality of the cross.

"It's clear the legal challenges at both the state and federal levels are not succeeding and we're confident that ultimately this issue can be put to rest once and for all. The Mt. Soledad Memorial is a historically significant tribute honoring veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces and poses no constitutional crisis," he said.

The filing by the ACLJ represents itself and 20 members of the 110th Congress including U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who sponsored legislation that transferred control of the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government. That legislation was signed into law by President Bush in August 2006.

In addition to Congressman Hunter, the ACLJ represents 19 other members of Congress: Todd Akin, Gresham Barrett, Eric Cantor, Michael Conaway, Barbara Cubin, John Culberson, Phil Gingrey, Jack Kingston, John Kline, Kenny Marchant, Patrick McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Gary Miller, Marilyn Musgrave, Randy Neugebauer, Joseph Pitts, Todd Tiahrt, Dave Weldon, and Lynn Westmoreland. The ACLJ also represents Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a California-based non-profit law firm.

The ACLJ brief contends the panel of the California Court of Appeals correctly ruled that the city's ballot proposition in which San Diego voters overwhelming supported the transfer of the memorial to the federal government was indeed constitutional.

"The Petition for Review should be denied because the clear purpose and effect of Proposition A is to preserve a historically significant war memorial, not to proselytize a particular religious viewpoint or coerce any religious activity," the brief concludes.

The ACLJ brief was filed just weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed a federal challenge against the city of San Diego, determining that legal challenge was moot since the federal government now owns the land on which the monument sits.

That brought to a close one chapter of the multiple-front battle over the cross, the ACLJ said.

The case to remove the cross originally was brought on behalf of an atheist, Phillip Paulsen, who died in 2006. Pending are the current state challenge, and a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the memorial.

The dispute began in 1989, and at one point the arguments included an order for San Diego 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.

More than 170,000 Americans, including 27,000 from California, have signed the ACLJ petition to preserve the memorial.

Mt. Soledad cross supporters win again
Symbol at San Diego memorial has been under attack for 18 years

Another court decision has endorsed the existence of a cross at the Mt. Soledad Memorial in San Diego, but the 18-year-old fight over whether it must be removed to satisfy a now-deceased lawsuit plaintiff still isn't over.

The newest decision came from the California state Supreme Court, and let stand an appellate court ruling that the decision by city voters to turn over to the federal government land on which the cross is located was proper.

"We're extremely pleased that the California Supreme Court has decided to reject this case which effectively brings an end to state litigation to remove the Mt. Soledad cross memorial," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, which specializes in constitutional law and had argued for that result.

"This represents the latest in a series of legal victories to keep the cross in place and we're confident that the final legal challenge – now in federal court – will ultimately fail as well," Sekulow said. "The cross memorial is an important symbol honoring veterans of our military. We believe this memorial will survive the final round of legal challenges and remain in place."

The state's high court denied a request to review the appellate court decision. The lower court had endorsed the constitutionality of a San Diego ballot initiative in which voters overwhelmingly approved a plan donating the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government, but the decision was challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The ACLJ had filed an amicus brief with the court earlier this month asking the state court to reject the appeal.

The ACLJ's brief suggested that the purpose of the vote was to preserve a historically significant war memorial, not to proselytize a particular religious viewpoint.

Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center also played a key role in the case, and said in addition to winning the arguments over the validity of the San Diego vote, his organization also was successful in fending off a request by the ACLU on the issue.

The ACLU, which is spearheading attacks on the cross, had asked the state Supreme Court to "depublish" the lower court opinion. "The ACLU wanted the decision depublished so it could continue with its anti-Christian agenda free from opposing precedent," said Thomson. "This appellate court decision will forever be a stumbling block for the ACLU – and we are pleased about that."

The only remaining litigation is a federal lawsuit that challenges the law signed by President Bush in 2006 that actually accepted the transfer of the property into the control of the federal government.

Just a month ago, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an earlier federal challenge that targeted the city of San Diego, noting that the claim was moot since the federal government, not the city, now controlled the land.

Several hundred thousand Americans, including 27,000 from California, have signed a petition assembled by the ACLJ to seek the preservation of the memorial.

The ACLJ's filing represented itself and 20 members of the 110th Congress including U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who sponsored legislation that transferred control of the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government.

The case to remove the cross originally was brought on behalf of an atheist, Phillip Paulsen, who died in 2006. The dispute began in 1989, and at one point the arguments included an order for San Diego 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 of the voters in July 2005, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of the veterans memorial.

As WND has reported, the cross was erected in 1954, and now honors veterans of World Wars I and II and the Korean War.

9th Circuit to decide 'Mojave Desert Cross' fate

The National Legal Foundation and its attorneys are awaiting a decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals following Monday's hearing on a case challenging the right of a World War I memorial cross to remain on public land in the middle of the Mojave Desert.

In the case of Buono v. Kempthorne, the National Legal Foundation (NLF) is fighting the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in an effort to save the Mojave Desert Cross. The large, white memorial cross has been located on Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve near the California-Nevada border since 1934, when it was given and erected by the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Attorney Joe Infranco is with Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), which argued an amicus brief for NLF at Monday's hearing. He says one of the last acts of Bill Clinton's presidency was his executive order authorizing the establishment of the land the cross stood on as a federal preserve.

"The ink was barely dry, and a local ACLU affiliate was filing a lawsuit," Infranco notes. The lawsuit challenging the monument's constitutionality alleged that its placement on federal land in the Mojave Desert violated the First Amendment's guarantee of separation of church and state and that the memorial cross should therefore be removed.

Supporters of the Mojave Desert Cross hoped to reach a settlement of the suit with the Department of Defense's transfer of the memorial land to private ownership in 2004. However, the ACLU claimed before the 9th Circuit that the property transfer was invalid -- a point ADF helped dispute in this week's appeals court hearing.

Such transfers already have legal precedent in several federal court cases, the ADF attorney notes. He says a number of federal appellate courts have already held that government property may be transferred to private ownership to prevent challenges based on the Establishment Clause, which, he notes "is that part of the First Amendment that is cited as the basis for the so-called separation of church and state." Although the jurisdictional circumstances were different, ADF recently helped defend a similar land transfer to save San Diego's Mount Soledad Cross in California.

Based on the precedents cited in the amicus brief, Infranco says ADF and the other cross supporters in Buono v. Kempthorne are hoping their argument that the transfer of the WWI memorial cross to private ownership was legal will prevail.

ACLJ Cases Coming Up This Summer

Summum v. Pleasant Grove - The latest attack on the public display of the Ten Commandments. A group is suing to display their own guidelines (the Seven ''Aphorisms''), and we're already preparing to go to the Supreme Court of the United States if necessary.

Trunk v. City of San Diego - Opponents of the Mt. Soledad war memorial cross refuse to give up. They're relentlessly fighting public expressions of the Christian faith, even after our court victories. We'll file an amicus brief in federal court soon.

McLean Bible Church v. McLane, et al. - We're in federal court because Fairfax County, Va., says a Bible church must become an official college or university in order to hold Bible studies or religious ministry classes in its facilities! It's an obvious, outrageous attempt to squelch churches' proclamation of the Gospel - and an attack on freedom of religion and speech.

We're preparing a federal case in defense of Teen Challenge, one of the world's most successful drug rehab programs. A local Tennessee planning commission has discriminated against this Christian organization by refusing them the use of property already zoned for rehab services!

They're working to turn back congressional efforts to pass a so-called ''Freedom of Choice Act,'' which would enshrine Roe v. Wade into law and open the floodgates for abortion.

They're also working on Capitol Hill to turn back attempts by liberals in Congress to advance the abortion lobby's agenda and restrict our religious liberties in other bills in Congress.

Mt. Soledad

Mt. Soledad challenge loses again!
'We are hopeful this epic legal battle soon will be resolved'

A California man who sued in federal court seeking to have a congressional decision nullified and a veterans' memorial cross on Mt. Soledad removed has lost on both counts, giving hope to memorial defenders the 18-year legal odyssey for the site soon will be over.

"We are very pleased with the court's decision and are hopeful that this epic legal battle will soon be resolved," said Pete Lepiscopo, of San Diego, an affiliate attorney for The Pacific Justice Institute, which has worked on amicus briefs in the case.

"There is a reason the U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, and the president intervened in this case to protect the Mt. Soledad War Memorial: this nation honors those who gave the ultimate sacrifice to insure such public expressions of faith can continue in this country," he said.

The case, which still has several minor issues pending, is the only remaining litigation over the existence of the cross at the war memorial in California. It challenged a law signed by President Bush in 2006 that actually accepted the transfer of ownership of the site from the city of San Diego to the federal government.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier dismissed a challenge targeting the city, since the federal government now controls the land. Several hundred thousand Americans, including 27,000 from California, also signed a petition assembled by the American Center for Law & Justice to seek the preservation of the memorial.

The ACLJ represented itself and 20 members of the 110th Congress including U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who sponsored legislation that transferred control of the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government.

The case to remove the cross originally was brought on behalf of an atheist, Phillip Paulsen, who died in 2006. The dispute dates back to 1989, and at one point the arguments included an order for San Diego to take the cross down. But in 1998 the city sold the property to the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Association, a move 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 76 percent of the voters in July 2005, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of the veterans memorial. Finally, Congress stepped and ordered the ownership of the land transferred to the federal government, a plan signed into law last year by President Bush.

As WND has reported, the cross was erected in 1954, and now honors veterans of World Wars I and II and the Korean War.

The latest decision from U.S. District Judge Larry Burns noted that the remaining plaintiff in the case, after Paulson's death, was Steve Trunk, but he had no standing to bring a complaint.

"Trunk has not met his burden of demonstrating he has standing to challenge the taking of the Mt. Soledad property by Public Law 109-272. This claim is therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. His requests for a declaration that the taking violated his California state constitutional and U.S. Constitutional rights, and for the court to encourage the parties to abide by the earlier settlement agreement are likewise denied for lack of jurisdiction," the judge concluded.

"Trunk has not shown he has suffered an 'injury in fact,' consisting of 'an invasion of a legally protected interest which is … concrete and particularized and … actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical," the court said.

"Last summer, after a court ordered San Diego to remove the war memorial, Congress and President Bush intervened by acquiring the land on which it sits. The atheists who have been fighting the cross for the better part of two decades filed a new federal lawsuit, alleging that the transfer was invalid," according to Pacific Justice.

"PJI attorneys, acting as amicus in the case, recognized significant jurisdictional problems with the new lawsuit and asked the court to consider them. Based on PJI's request, Judge Burns required additional briefing … and yesterday issued a 19-page order agreeing with PJI that most of the claims were no longer valid, and the City of San Diego should no longer be a defendant," the law firm's statement said.

"The court also took the opportunity to note that there is nothing inherently wrong with a cross on public land," the statement said.

"This case has huge implications not only for San Diego and the West Coast, but for the entire nation," added Brad Dacus, president of PJI. "We will continue to fight until we obtain a final judgment that this time-honored war memorial – like the fallen soldiers it honors – can rest in peace."

The remaining questions, a spokesman for PJI told WND, were less substantive and the court ordered briefs be filed immediately by interested parties in order to dispose of those soon.

The latest lawsuit had wanted the court to issue both a preliminary and permanent injunction preventing the display of the long-standing cross on the memorial. But the judge's ruling noted a previous Order to Show Cause "took care to point out the fact that a large cross is located mountain is not an Establishment Clause violation, nor was the government ownership or non-ownership of land on Mt. Soledad, nor were mere efforts by officials or voters who wished the cross to remain where it was."

"Clearly, Trunk would prefer above all else that the California constitutional violations were brought to an end by removal of the cross, However, his wishes … cannot give rise to standing," the court said. "Now those violations have ended, he has no standing to complain about the manner in which they ended."

Those state violations vanished when Congress assigned ownership of the land to the federal government, and that became law, the judge said.

"The United States is of course not limited by or subject to the California constitution … and therefore cannot be liable for either violating or evading it," the judge found.

Richard Thompson, chief counsel for the Thomas More Law Center, has been representing San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial in the case, while Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, also has filed arguments in the case.

Members of Congress, again, affirm U.S. owns cross
Brief seeks conclusion to decades-long dispute over Mt. Soledad memorial

Dozens of members of Congress are asking a federal court to affirm the transfer of ownership of San Diego's Mt. Soledad veterans memorial to the federal government, and end a case that has encompassed nearly two decades.

The American Center for Law & Justice has filed an amicus brief on behalf of more than 30 members of Congress seeking a ruling that Congress, when it approved the transfer of ownership of the site, acted constitutionally.

"The federal government acted appropriately and constitutionally when it acquired the Mt. Soledad Memorial, a move that was overwhelmingly approved by voters of San Diego," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ.

"Over the years, there have been numerous state and federal challenges, all aimed at removing the memorial. Those attempts have failed and we're hopeful this latest legal challenge will not succeed. The federal government's ownership and operation of the memorial is proper and plays a vital role in ensuring that this important symbol honoring military veterans remains in place," he said.

The remaining issue in the case pending before U.S. District Court in San Diego is the transfer of the ownership of the memorial site from the city of San Diego to the federal government.

"Like all democratically elected bodies, Congress has a great interest in giving effect to the will of the people on issues of public importance," the brief said. "The widespread support among San Diego voters for the federal government's operation of the memorial cut across religious, political, and cultural lines."

"The pertinent question is whether the federal government's operation of the entire memorial is consistence with the Establishment Clause, not whether a Latin cross has religious meaning in various contexts," the group said.

The ACLJ represents 33 members of the 110th Congress, including Todd Akin, Gresham Barrett, Rob Bishop, Dan Burton, John Campbell, Eric Cantor, Steve Chabot, Michael Conaway, Barbara Cubin, John Culberson, John Doolittle, Tom Feeney, Virginia Foxx, Scott Garrett, Phil Gingrey, Louis Gohmert, Steve King, Jack Kingston, John Kline, Keeny Marchant, Patrick McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Gary Miller, Marilyn Musgrave, Sue Myrick, Randy Neugebauer, Steve Pearce, Joseph Pitts, Dana Rohrabacher, Tom Tancredo, Todd Tiahrt, Dave Weldon and Lynn Westmoreland.

The brief supports the city of San Diego and the U.S. government, who are defendants in a federal lawsuit that challenges legislation signed into law by President Bush in 2006 changing ownership of the site from the city to the federal government. The brief was filed in conjunction with Advocates for Faith & Freedom, a California law firm serving as co-counsel in the case.

The odyssey over the memorial was launched in the 1980s, and many thought it was resolved when Congress intervened in 2006.

"There is a reason the U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, and the president intervened in this case to protect the Mt. Soledad War Memorial: this nation honors those who gave the ultimate sacrifice to insure such public expressions of faith can continue in this country," said Pete Lepiscopo, of San Diego, an affiliate attorney for The Pacific Justice Institute, which also has worked on amicus briefs in the case.

The case is the only remaining litigation over the existence of the cross at the war memorial in California. It challenged a law signed by President Bush in 2006 that actually accepted the transfer of ownership of the site from the city of San Diego to the federal government.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier dismissed a challenge targeting the city, since the federal government now controls the land. Several hundred thousand Americans, including 27,000 from California, also signed a petition assembled by the ACLJ to seek the preservation of the memorial.

The case to remove the cross originally was brought on behalf of an atheist, Phillip Paulsen, who died in 2006. The dispute dates back to 1989, and at one point the arguments included an order for San Diego to take the cross down. But in 1998 the city sold the property to the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Association, a move 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 76 percent of the voters in July 2005, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of the veterans memorial. Finally, Congress stepped in and ordered the ownership of the land transferred to the federal government, a plan signed into law by President Bush.

As WND has reported, the cross was erected in 1954, and now honors veterans of World Wars I and II and the Korean War.

The latest decision from U.S. District Judge Larry Burns noted that the remaining plaintiff in the case, after Paulson's death, was Steve Trunk, but he had no standing to bring a complaint.

"Trunk has not met his burden of demonstrating he has standing to challenge the taking of the Mt. Soledad property by Public Law 109-272. This claim is therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. His requests for a declaration that the taking violated his California state constitutional and U.S. Constitutional rights, and for the court to encourage the parties to abide by the earlier settlement agreement are likewise denied for lack of jurisdiction," the judge concluded.

"Trunk has not shown he has suffered an 'injury in fact,' consisting of 'an invasion of a legally protected interest which is … concrete and particularized and … actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical," the court said.

The latest case alleging the transfer was filed after Congress and President Bush took action to affirm the memorial's ownership by the U.S. government.

Richard Thompson, chief counsel for the Thomas More Law Center, has been representing San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial in the case.

Judge rules Mt. Soledad cross constitutional
'The primary effect is patriotic and nationalistic, not religious'

A judge has concluded that a cross located at the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial near San Diego is constitutional and can remain where it is on federal property, but the 20-year-old battle over the symbol – one of thousands at the memorial – apparently still is not over.

"When the cross is considered in the context of the larger memorial and especially the numerous other secular elements, the primary effect is patriotic and nationalistic, not religious," wrote U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns.

"The Court finds the memorial at Mt. Soledad, including its Latin cross, communicates the primarily non-religious messages of military service, death and sacrifice," he said.

"This is a wonderful victory, not only for the families of Majors (Michael D.) Martino and (Gerald) Bloomfield (III) who can have some comfort knowing that the memories of their loves ones are preserved under the cross, but for all Americans who care about our young men and women who have sacrificed their lives in defense of our country," said Richard Thompson, chief of the Thomas More Law Center, one of several law firms whose members have been active in the case over the years.

"Sadly, I fully expect the ACLU attorneys to appeal this decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. So this fight is not over," he said.

The center advocated for the cross remaining in place on behalf of the families of the majors, both of whom were killed in combat in Iraq in 2005 when their attack helicopter was shot down by a surface-to-air missile.

The case to remove the cross originally was brought on behalf of an atheist, Phillip Paulsen, who died in 2006. The dispute dates back to 1989, and at one point the arguments included an order for San Diego to take the cross down. But in 1998 the city sold the property to the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Association, a move 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 76 percent of the voters in July 2005, called for the city to donate the cross to the federal government as the centerpiece of the veterans memorial. Finally, Congress stepped and ordered the ownership of the land transferred to the federal government, a plan signed into law last year by President Bush.

As WND has reported, the cross was erected in 1954, and now honors veterans including those of World Wars I and II and the Korean War.

The judge said the cross has been there for 54 years and has been used "for religious and non-religious events, including Easter sunrise services (some of which have been broadcast to troops overseas), veterans' reunions, memorial services, weddings, and family gatherings.

"There is no history of discrimination between religious and nonreligious gropus in the issuance of municipal permits to use the site," he added.

Further, "The cross on Mt. Soledad is, as Congress accurately described it, 'fully integrated' as the centerpiece of a 'multi-faceted' veterans' memorial 'that is replete with secular symbols,'" the judge said. "In fact, in terms of the number of elements the memorial comprises, secular symbols predominate with over 2,000 individual memorial plaques, 23 military bollards, numerous inscribed paving stones, a tall flagpole and large American flag, and a bronze plaque commemorating the dedication of the memorial in 1954. And except for the cross, there are no other religious elements such as altars, statues, religious texts, or a chapel," the judge said.

"The physical setting of the memorial, moreover, neither compels nor encourages religious devotion. For one thing, physical access to the cross is blocked by an iron fence. Also, there are no benches immediately adjacent to and facing the cross, nor any other fixtures or devotional trappings inviting veneration of the cross," he continued. "Finally, the location of the memorial makes it an unlikely venue for government indoctrination. Located away from the hub of downtown and the seat of government, Mt. Soledad park is more a destination than a way station."

The original dispute was voided by the transfer of ownership to the federal government, and Burns' decision comes in a new round of legal actions launched against the U.S. government after that transfer.

In a letter to the private association that runs the memorial, President Bush said, "Mt. Soledad becomes a place to reflect on our past, be inspired by true patriots, and offer war veterans our heartfelt gratitude for the freedom we all enjoy today."

Charles LiMandri, the West Coast director for the Thomas More Law Center, said residents of San Diego "wanted and deserve" this result.

Opponents, he said, "are not going to be able to take that cross down, and they should just deal with it."

Rees Lloyd, a longtime California civil rights attorney and director of the Defense of Veterans Memorials Project of The American Legion Department of California, said he expected the issue to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

LiMandri said, "We are confident that when this case reaches the Supreme Court, justice will finally prevail and put an end to this fanatical litigation of atheists and others backed by the ACLU."

"This Mt. Soledad National Veterans Memorial victory is great news not only for veterans but for all freedom loving Americans," said Thomas Bock of Colorado, the past national commander of the American Legion. "It has been a long battle, and may not be completely over, but when good people take on a good cause they will eventually succeed over evil."

"We will continue to stand, as long as it takes, with our allies in the Thomas More Law Center, and the Alliance Defense Fund, in the legal fight to protect Mt. Soledad National Veterans Memorial, and all other veterans memorials, from desecration by the abusive legal assaults of the ACLU and others who have no respect for veterans or our American heritage," said Al Lennox, commander of the 130,000-member American Legion Department of California.

Among other groups who have been active in the case on behalf of the memorial are the Pacific Justice Institute and the American Center for Law and Justice.

ChristiansUnite Forums

Entertainment => Politics and Political Issues => Topic started by: nChrist on May 24, 2005, 05:22:48 PM