Supreme Court to Review Lower Court Decision That Puts Displays of National Heritage at Risk

“The Supreme Court is faced with a dramatic opportunity . . . preserve sound precedent or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution,” -Jay Sekulow, chief counsel, ACLJ

WASHINGTON, March 31, 2008—Today, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to review a 10th Circuit ruling that would leave local governments around the country with two options:  remove long-standing monuments or permit any group to display any monument in public places. The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), focusing on constitutional law, is pleased the Supreme Court has granted their Petition for Writ of Certiorari to review Pleasant Grove City v. Summum.

"We're delighted that the Supreme Court agreed to take this critical case," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, which represents the two Utah cities of Pleasant Grove and Duchesne. "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."

The ACLJ contends that the decision by the appeals court "threatens to wreak havoc upon governments at every level and their ability to control the permanent physical occupation of government land."

"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.

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" 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.

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-