Sanity from our courts? Will wonders never cease?
"The monument, built in the shape of a Latin cross by the American Legion and located at the intersection of Maryland Route 450 and U.S. Route 1 in Bladensburg, was first dedicated in 1925, although the effort to raise funds to build the memorial started in late 1918. Since 1960, the monument has been owned and maintained by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, although prior to that time it was owned and maintained by the American Legion.
The monument is part of a local Veterans Memorial Park that also contains memorials to veterans and those who died in World War II, Pearl Harbor, Korea and Vietnam, 9/11, the War of 1812 and the Battle of Bladensburg. The Bladensburg Cross has a plaque that says the “Memorial Cross is dedicated to the heroes of Prince George’s County Maryland who lost their lives in the Great War for the liberty of the world” and has a quotation from President Woodrow Wilson. Four words are inscribed on each face of the cross: “valor; endurance; courage; devotion.”
The lawsuit was filed by the American Humanist Association, as well as several individuals who were apparently “offended” that they had to drive by the monument and see it every day on what is a very busy highway. They claimed that because the World War I memorial is in the shape of a cross, “ownership, maintenance and prominent display of the Monument on public property violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.” The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was denied permission to file an amicus brief on the side of the plaintiffs. The Liberty Institute and Jones Day represented the defendants.
In her Nov. 30 order, Chasanow granted summary judgment to the defendants, concluding that the monument does not violate the Constitution. The court found that the “vast majority” of events and gatherings at the monument and the Veterans Memorial Park have been in “commemoration of Memorial Day or Veterans Day.”
The fact that the plaintiffs in this case were really grasping to try to turn this war memorial into a religious issue was demonstrated by the fact that the only evidence they could dig up on that issue was a “Washington Post column indicating that there were at least three Sunday religious services held at the Monument in 1931.” The trivialness of their claims is shown by their having to go back in time more than 80 years to find even a small handful of religious services.
Additionally, the plaintiffs tried to dirty the water by falsely alleging that the Ku Klux Klan was somehow involved with the monument. The federal judge inserted a special footnote to point out that the claim was not supported by any evidence; the “[p]laintiffs’ suggestion of some connection [to the KKK] is simply wrong.”
The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show a violation of the Establishment Clause under either of the two tests derived from two different U.S. Supreme Court cases, Lemon v Kurtzman (1971) and Van Orden v. Perry (2005). Judge Chasanow said that both tests “require the [c]ourt to inquire into the nature, context, and history” of the monument. Applying both tests in this case “lead to the same result” that the memorial is not an unconstitutional display."
http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/01/judge-throws-out-lawsuit-filed-by-those-who-found-a-wwi-memorial-cross-offensive/
