Mt. Soledad breaking news…great news
Posted on January 12, 2007
From the 9th Circuit: Opinion
1. The appeal by the City of the district court’s May 3, 2006 order (the one that said the city must rip down the cross by Aug. 1, 2006 or face a $5,000/day fine) to enforce a December 3, 1991 injunction under California constitutional authority is dismissed as moot.
2. The appeal of the district court’s denial of intervention, filed by the San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial, is also dismissed as moot.
3. The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate the May 3, 2006 order to enforce the 1991 injunction.
4. The case is remanded to the district court to determine whether, and to what extent, counsel for plaintiff-appellee may be entitled to attorneys’ fees.
The question I have is why the ACLU has fought this ridiculous battle for two decades. Is there really a noble principle they are reaching for or is this just plain old hostility? Easy answer.
ADF Release: 9th Circuit decides order to tear down Mt. Soledad cross must be vacated
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, Church And State, News
Trackback URL
Comments
5 Responses to “Mt. Soledad breaking news…great news”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
The answer obviously is agenda-driven hostility on the ACLU’s part. I wonder if they will ever follow through on their threatened lawsuits against St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana over their plans to erect a monument to victims of Hurricane Katrina even though the monument will be on private property and has been organized by people (public officials included) on their own personal time rather than on city/parish time. The ACLU would lose but they would stretch it out trying to intimidate Parish officials. However riling up cajuns is never a good idea especially one as feisty as Junior Rodriguez.
They (the ACLU) are doing it for the bucks.
RE: “4. The case is remanded to the district court to determine whether, and to what extent, counsel for plaintiff-appellee may be entitled to attorneys’ fees.”
Taxpayer bucks.
So, what’s the real final result?
Will the cross be on public or private land?
What has the ACLU been told to do/not do?
Attention ACLU, Yes you are every decent citizen’s enemy but if you drink deep from the Jim Jones Kool Aid we will forgive you.
The ACLU is out to force their Secular religious beliefs on everyone else. That is plain for everyone who has eyes to see.