Associated Press - Federal Court Upholds La Crosse Commandments Monument
January 5, 2005
MADISON A federal appeals court ruled the city of La Crosses decision to sell a Ten Commandments monument and the land around it to a private service group was constitutional, but the group seeking the monuments removal called the sale a sham and said it would appeal.
A split three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled Monday the sale did not violate the separation of church and state.
The decision overturned a federal judge in Madison who had ruled the sale was meant to sidestep constitutional issues and ordered the monuments removal from land that formerly was part of a downtown city park.
The appeals court stressed similar efforts to keep religious monuments on public lands must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Still, it found the La Crosse arrangement was proper.
Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which joined two La Crosse residents in a 2002 suit seeking to remove the monument, said Tuesday they would likely ask the full appeals court to review the decision. The Madison-based foundation argued the display violated the separation of church and state.
The reason for the monument is religious, Gaylor said. This is a sham sale.
To defuse the groups suit, the city sold a 22-by-20-foot plot of land in the public park to the Fraternal Order of Eagles, which originally donated the monument to the city in 1965. Both the Eagles and the city have erected fences around the monument indicating it is on private property and disclaiming city endorsement of religion.
The federal appeals court found the sale was not made to advance religion and the sale to the Eagles made practical sense. The monument now sits across the street from the groups office, and Eagles members will continue to maintain the site.
The American Center for Law and Justice, a law firm founded by the Rev. Pat Robertson that is representing the club, has fought several attempts to remove such monuments and is involved in two appeals now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Chief counsel Jay Sekulow said the U.S. Supreme Courts decision could dictate when such displays are allowable. Still, he said the appeals court decision establishes the parameters that other communities could follow.
This could be a new alternative way to maintain these historic monuments in these town squares, Sekulow said. The Seventh Circuit gave that a constitutional stamp of approval.
The appeals court used a prior decision in a Marshfield case in reaching its conclusion. In that case, the city sold a 15-foot-tall statute of Jesus Christ and the land around it in a public park to a group of residents. The city also placed a disclaimer near the statute state the location of the monument was not an endorsement of religion.
Still, the appeals court pointed out simply selling the land around a religious monument on public property does not make it constitutional. It noted the land around the monument in La Crosse was sold for market value and complied with state law regarding the sale of municipal land.
The judges also noted the location of the monument was significant. It is not near a governmental building and residents do not have to pass by it to conduct public business.
La Crosse is not selling property inextricably linked with the seat of government. Obviously, a city could not sell space under the dome of its City Hall or the sidewalk in front of the courthouse steps, the court found. Such sale would be, on its face, a sham.
La Crosse Mayor John Medinger said it was clear the appeals court would have found the display unconstitutional if the city had not sold the land and the monument to the Eagles and taken steps to cordon it off from public property.
Still, he said the arrangement has not made everyone happy. Those who wanted it removed completely are disappointed and the display looks like the Ten Commandments in jail because its surrounded by two fences.
Hopefully now this will end it and we can stop fighting with each other, he said.