The U.S. Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in the case of Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 07-665 -- the first major religion case since Van Orden v. Perry and McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky were decided in 2005.
Summum's attorney, Pamela Harris, argued today that Summum has the free speech and equal access rights to place a monument in the same park where the city permitted the Fraternal Order of Eagles to erect a Ten Commandments monolith in 1971. Pleasant Grove countered by saying that it owns and controls the Ten Commandments monolith and, therefore, it represents government speech, which is not subject to traditional free speech and equal access claims.
The American Humanist Association filed a friend of the court brief in support of neither party.
"In my opinion, the Supreme Court will reverse the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and hold that city parks are not public forums for donated permanent displays," said Robert Ritter, legal coordinator for the Appignani Humanist Legal Center, the legal arm of the American Humanist Association. "We further asked the Court to send the case back to the district court for argument on whether the Eagles Ten Commandments monolith in Pioneer Park violates the Establishment Clause."
More...
See also:
A Case of Religious Discrimination
