WASHINGTON, June 25 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on
Monday let stand a ruling that a large Christian cross as part
of a war memorial in California violated the constitutional ban
on government endorsement of religion.
The justices rejected an appeal by the Obama administration
and by an association that erected the cross arguing the
government should not be forced to take down the memorial cross
that stood atop Mount Soledad in San Diego since 1954 to honor
veterans.
The case involved whether a religious symbol can be
prominently displayed on public land and whether the cross
violated the U.S. Constitution's requirement on church-state
separation.
The Supreme Court has been closely divided and has struggled
for years to come up with clear rules on what religious
displays, ranging from crosses to the Ten Commandments, can be
put on public property, along with secular items.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that a federal judge erred
by ordering the removal of a large Christian cross as part of a
war memorial in a remote part of the California desert. But that
ruling did not decide the constitutionality of the cross.
The 43-foot high San Diego cross is surrounded by walls
displaying granite plaques that commemorate veterans or veterans
groups. Located between the Pacific Ocean and an interstate
highway, it can be seen for miles.
Easter services were held annually at the cross from 1954
until at least 2000, according to court documents.
The cross has been the subject of litigation since 1989 when
two veterans sued San Diego in an effort to get it off city
land. In 2006, Congress intervened in the dispute, resulting in
the federal government taking ownership of the property.
A group of plaintiffs, including the Jewish War Veterans of
the United States of America, then sued. A U.S. appeals court
ruled for the plaintiffs that the dominance of the cross in the
memorial conveyed a message of government endorsement of
religion.
The Obama administration and a group called the Mount
Soledad Memorial Association, which erected the cross, supported
by 20 states and various veterans groups, appealed to the
Supreme Court in arguing the cross should be allowed as part of
the memorial.
Solicitor General Donald Verrilli said in the
administration's appeal that the government would have to "tear
down" the cross if the Supreme Court rejected its petition.
A. Stephen Hut, an attorney for the plaintiffs, opposed the
administration's appeal. He wrote in a brief filed with the high
court that the appeals court correctly concluded, based on the
history, location and visibility of the cross, that its
continued display violated the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court stayed out of the dispute, issuing a brief
order that denied the appeals by the administration and the
association without comment.
Justice Samuel Alito issued a separate statement saying the
denial of the appeals does not amount to a ruling on the merits.
Alito wrote that the federal government can raise the same
issue later after an entry of final judgment in the case. He
said it remained unclear precisely what action the federal
government will be required to take.
The Supreme Court cases are Mount Soledad Memorial
Association v. Trunk, No. 11-998, and United States v. Trunk,
No. 11-1115.
For Mount Seledad Memorial Association: Allyson Ho of
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.
For the United States: Donald Verrilli Jr., Solicitor
General of the United States.
For Trunk: Stephen Hut Jr.
(Reporting By James Vicini)
Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook