Reply Brief Filed at Supreme Court in “Monumental” First Ammendment Case

Numerous Amicus Filings Support ACLJ Effort to Protect Nation's Heritage

WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2008—Today the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) filed its reply brief at the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Pleasant Grove City v. Summum.  The brief contains written legal arguments on behalf of a Utah city - but with ramifications that could impact First Amendment rights for communities across the country.   The ACLJ is appealing a lower-court decision that would leave local governments with two options: remove long-standing monuments or permit any group to display any monument - regardless of content - in public places. 

The Supreme Court granted the ACLJ's petition to hear Pleasant Grove City v. Summum on March 31, 2008. 

"Summum's assertion of a right to force its monument upon the city has no legitimate basis in Supreme Court case law," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, who will present oral arguments to the high court Nov. 12 on behalf of Pleasant Grove.  "We're hopeful the high court will overturn the Tenth Circuit's decision that ultimately would cause havoc for local governments, forcing them to remove long-standing and well established patriotic, religious and historical displays to avoid being sued for failure to put up any and every other proposed monument to come along the pike."

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 re-hear 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" monuments in the cities' parks because the cities already displayed monuments of the Ten Commandments, which were donated decades ago.

The ACLJ reply brief (posted at www.aclj.org) explains:  "The basic question is whether a city gets to decide which permanent, unattended monuments, if any, to install on city property.  The answer is ‘Yes.'" 

Fifteen friend-of-the-court briefs have been filed supporting the ACLJ's position, including briefs from the United States government, 14 states, nine cities (including New York), veterans groups (including the American Legion and the VFW), and various religious liberty groups (including both Christian and Jewish organizations).  

The Supreme Court announced on March 31, 2008, that it had granted the ACLJ's petition to hear the case.  Today's filing represents the final salvo in an exchange of written arguments. The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for Nov. 12 and will likely issue a decision sometime in 2009.

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.

-30-