JD Journal » salazar v buono http://www.jdjournal.com Legal Industry News Wed, 08 Feb 2012 01:14:49 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 Monterey Cross Cut Down by Vandals http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/21/monterey-cross-cut-down-by-vandals/ http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/21/monterey-cross-cut-down-by-vandals/#comments Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:27:37 +0000 joshua http://www.jdjournal.com/?p=17505 A cross that has stood on Del Monte Beach in Monterey, California since 1969 has been cut down and left in the sand. The cross has been part of an ongoing dispute between the city and the local chapter of the ACLU, who see it as a violation of the establishment clause. The city contends that it is a historic marker, and not a religious symbol.

The cross was erected in 1969 in celebration of the city’s 200th anniversary, in the spot where Don Gaspar de Portola erected a wooden cross in 1769 as a beacon to a resupply ship from Mexico that was lost at sea.

At least three law firms have offered to represent the city in an legal challenges, should Monterey decide to restore the cross. Deborah Mail, the City Attorney, says she has been talking with the Pacific Justice Institute, which has offered free legal representation.

The situation with the Monterey cross differs from the cross at issue in Salazar v Buono, argued recently before the Supreme Court, because the cross in Monterey still sits on public lands. However if the Court sides with the government in Salazar, it provides a possible solution for the city in this case.

Related Posts:
]]> http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/21/monterey-cross-cut-down-by-vandals/feed/ 2 Salazar v Buono Argued Today at Supreme Court http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/07/salazar-v-buono-argued-today-at-supreme-court/ http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/07/salazar-v-buono-argued-today-at-supreme-court/#comments Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:03:57 +0000 joshua http://www.jdjournal.com/?p=17270 The Court today heard arguments in Salazar v Buono, a highly anticipated establishment clause case. Many observers thought the Court might decide the case on standing, leaving the pricklier 1st amendment issue alone, but based on oral arguments that seems unlikely. The case was brought by a retired National Parks Service employee who objected to a cross on park lands that serves as a war memorial for World War One veterans. Although the cross was originally erected privately and continues to be maintained privately, it stood for years on land owned by the government. To protect it from 1st amendment claims made by the retired employee, Congress voted to sell a small patch of land, including the rock on which the cross stands, to the VFW. At issue now is whether or not doing so removed the establishment clause issue.

Related Posts:
]]> http://www.jdjournal.com/2009/10/07/salazar-v-buono-argued-today-at-supreme-court/feed/ 0