ACLJ Asks Supreme Court to Review and Overturn Rulings

"We're hopeful the high court will take the cases and correct a troubling decision that would ultimately force local governments to remove long-standing and well-established patriotic, religious and historical displays." —Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ

WASHINGTON, March 7, 2008—A group trying to force two Utah cities to display a monument in city parks could force communities across the country to remove decades-old displays of our nation's heritage. To keep that from happening, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is urging the Supreme Court of the United States to take the cases and overturn recent lower court rulings.

"The Supreme Court is faced with a dramatic opportunity to either preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech-or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to create havoc in communities across America," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, which represents the two Utah cities of Pleasant Grove and Duchesne. 

According to the ACLJ, the lower court decisions miss a key distinction between government speech and private speech, arguing that the government has to be neutral toward private speech, but it does not have to be neutral in its own speech.

"The 10th Circuit confused this rule when it said private parties have a First Amendment right to put up the monuments of their choosing in a city park, unless the city takes away all other donated monuments. It is our hope the Supreme Court steps in to correct this flawed reasoning," said Sekulow.

The ACLJ today filed reply briefs (posted online at www.aclj.org) with the high court in two separate cases. The ACLJ filed a Reply to Brief in Opposition regarding its Petitions for Writ of Certiorari in the cases of Pleasant Grove City v.  Summum (No. 07-665) and Duchesne City v. Summum (No. 07-690).

In August 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit split 6-6 over a request for the full appeals court to rehear two cases involving demands that the Utah cities of Pleasant Grove City and Duchesne City erect monuments containing the "Seven Aphorisms" of a group called Summum. The federal appeals court had ruled in favor of Summum in both cases, saying the group could insist upon erecting its own "Seven Aphorisms" monument in the city parks because the cities already displayed monuments of the Ten Commandments which were donated decades ago.

The ACLJ argues that unless the lower court decisions are overturned, cities and states will face a difficult choice: Remove long-standing monuments-or permit any group to display any monument in public places. 

With today's filings, the Supreme Court will now consider the two Utah cases at conference and determine whether it will take the cases or let the lower court decisions stand. The Justices could make a decision on whether to accept the cases within the next few weeks.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C. The ACLJ is online at www.aclj.org. The ACLJ's online newsroom can be accessed at www.DeMossNewsPond.com/ACLJ.

-30-