Back in Court on Mt. Soledad

Representing some 20 members of Congress, today we filed an amicus brief asking the California Supreme Court to deny review of a lower court decision, which declared a ballot proposition constitutional in which San Diego voters overwhelmingly supported a measure donating the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government.  The filing of our amicus brief comes just weeks after a federal appeals court dismissed a separate legal challenging the cross memorial.
 
The state appeals court got this right, and there is simply no reason for the California Supreme Court to take this appeal.  Its clear the legal challenges at both the state and federal levels are not succeeding, and it is time for this issue to be put to rest once and for all.  The Mt. Soledad Memorial is a historically significant tribute honoring veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces.  This memorial poses no constitutional crisis, and we will continue to work to ensure that it remains in place.
 
In our filing with the California Supreme Court, we represented ourselves and 20 members of the 110th Congress, including Congressman Duncan Hunter of California who sponsored legislation that transferred control of the Mt. Soledad Memorial to the federal government.  That legislation was signed into law by President Bush in August 2006.
 
In addition to Congressman Hunter, we represented 19 other members of Congress:  Todd Akin, Gresham Barrett, Eric Cantor, Michael Conaway, Barbara Cubin, John Culberson, Phil Gingrey, Jack Kingston, John Kline, Kenny Marchant, Patrick McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Gary Miller, Marilyn Musgrave, Randy Neugebauer, Joseph Pitts, Todd Tiahrt, Dave Weldon, and Lynn Westmoreland.  We also represented Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a California-based non-profit law firm.
 
Our brief contends that the panel of the California Court of Appeals correctly ruled that the citys ballot proposition--in which San Diego voters overwhelming supported the transfer of the memorial to the federal government--was indeed constitutional.
 
We urged the states highest court not to take the case:  The Petition for Review should be denied because the clear purpose and effect of Proposition A is to preserve a historically significant war memorial, not to proselytize a particular religious viewpoint or coerce any religious activity.   The brief concludes.  A panel of the California Court of Appeals carefully considered and unanimously rejected the arguments raised in the Petition for Review. The panels decision is consistent with the United States and California Constitutions. The Petition for Review should be denied.
 
The filing comes just weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed a federal challenge against the City of San Diego, determining that legal challenge was moot since the federal government now owns the land on which the monument sits.
 
The Mount Soledad case has generated national interest with more than 170,000 Americans including more than 27,000 Californians signing on to our Petition to Preserve the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial.