{"id":93,"date":"2008-11-11T12:03:58","date_gmt":"2008-11-11T12:03:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html"},"modified":"2008-11-11T12:03:58","modified_gmt":"2008-11-11T12:03:58","slug":"supreme-court-must-protect-nat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation’s Heritage Displayed in America’s Cities"},"content":{"rendered":"

Barry, as you note, the Summum group did not bring an Establishment Clause challenge in this case.  <\/span>In this First Amendment case, we believe the Supreme Court is faced with an easy choice:  <\/span>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 cities and localities across America.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

If the 10th<\/sup> Circuit decision is permitted to stand, the fact is that cities could be forced to either dismantle a host of monuments, memorials, and other displays, including long-standing patriotic and historical displays, or else let all comers install privately owned monuments or displays, regardless of content. <\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

Under the 10th<\/sup> Circuit’s logic, federal, state, and local government bodies would be sitting targets for demands that they cede piece after piece of government land to forced occupation, by any group, with whatever monuments that group wishes to have installed, be it Summum’s Seven Aphorisms, PETA’s suffering circus elephant, or Fred Phelps’s denunciation of homosexuals.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

It’s our position that cities like Pleasant Grove are engaging in government speech which gives the government authority to control its message.  <\/span>In this case, just because the city years ago decided to accept and display a donated monument of the Ten Commandments from the Fraternal Order of Eagles (as thousands of communities did nationwide) does not compel the city to accept and display any other monument.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

In our briefs<\/a> <\/font><\/font><\/font>submitted in this case, we have made it clear that in our view the 10th Circuit made several crucial errors in constitutional analysis.  <\/span>We argue that the First Amendment does not require that a government park be turned into a cluttered junkyard of monuments contributed by all comers.<\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

The appeals court confused the distinction between government speech and private speech.   <\/span>Our brief contends that “a city’s selection of which items to display in a park – like its selection of decorations for government buildings – is government speech, and no private entity can claim a ‘Me too!’ right of access for its own preferred displays.”<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

“That the items the government selects may have private origins does not mean that the private sources are the ones who are speaking through the selection process,” our briefs contend.  <\/span>“For example, while The Great Gatsby is admittedly not government speech, the selection of that book for placement on a public library’s shelves is government speech. F. Scott Fitzgerald (were he still alive) could neither insist on the book’s inclusion . . . nor object to its removal from the shelves to make way for the latest Harry Potter book.”<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

Further, accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

As we argue in our reply brief<\/a>, <\/font>the basic question is whether a city gets to decide which permanent, unattended monuments, if any, to install on city property.  <\/span>In our view, the answer must be ‘Yes.’<\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

Barry, I had hoped you would have filed an amicus brief supporting our position.  <\/span>Many other organizations and groups did.  <\/span>Fifteen friend-of- the-court briefs have been filed supporting our position, including briefs from the United States government, fourteen states, nine cities (including New York City), veterans groups (including the American Legion and the VFW), and various religious liberty groups (including both Christian and Jewish organizations).<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/p>\n

As with any oral argument before the high court, I am expecting a vibrant and engaging exchange with the Justices tomorrow.  <\/span>I am hopeful that a majority of the high court will uphold this important distinction between government speech and private speech.  <\/span>And that means overturning the 10th<\/sup> Circuit.<\/font><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Barry, as you note, the Summum group did not bring an Establishment Clause challenge in this case.  In this First Amendment case, we believe the Supreme Court is faced with an easy choice:  preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech – or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":163,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-93","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-courts"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court Must Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities - Lynn v. Sekulow<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities - Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Barry, as you note, the Summum group did not bring an Establishment Clause challenge in this case.  In this First Amendment case, we believe the Supreme Court is faced with an easy choice:  preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech – or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-11-11T12:03:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jay Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities - Lynn v. Sekulow","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities - Lynn v. Sekulow","og_description":"Barry, as you note, the Summum group did not bring an Establishment Clause challenge in this case.  In this First Amendment case, we believe the Supreme Court is faced with an easy choice:  preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech – or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html","og_site_name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","article_published_time":"2008-11-11T12:03:58+00:00","author":"Jay Sekulow","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html","name":"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities - Lynn v. Sekulow","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-11T12:03:58+00:00","dateModified":"2008-11-11T12:03:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2008\/11\/supreme-court-must-protect-nat.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreme Court Must Protect Nation’s Heritage Displayed in America’s Cities"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/","name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","description":"A debate blog about church, state, faith and politics with Jay Sekulow and Barry W. Lynn","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf","name":"Jay Sekulow","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","caption":"Jay Sekulow"},"description":"Jay Alan Sekulow is Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization that focuses on constitutional law.  He is also Chief Counsel of the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ). Jay Sekulow has also served as a faculty member for the Office of Legal Education at the United States Department of Justice.  As a member of the faculty he instructed Assistant United States Attorneys and investigators in the First Amendment issues associated with prosecution of obscenity. An accomplished and respected judicial advocate, Sekulow has presented oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in numerous cases in defense of constitutional freedoms. Several landmark cases argued by Sekulow before the U.S. Supreme Court have become part of the legal landscape in the area of religious liberty litigation.  In the Mergens case, Sekulow cleared the way for public school students to form Bible clubs and religious organizations on their school campuses.  In the Lamb's Chapel case, Sekulow defended the free speech rights of religious groups, ensuring that they be treated equally with respect to the use of public facilities.  And, most recently, in McConnell v. FEC, Sekulow ensured that the constitutional rights of young people remain protected with a unanimous decision by the high court guaranteeing that minors can participate in political campaigns. A nationally recognized and respected defender of religious freedom, Sekulow has assembled one of the most prestigious law firms in the nation.  Founded in 1990, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses in constitutional law.  The ACLJ, under Sekulow's direction, is involved in public interest and public policy issues working to protect religious and constitutional liberties. In 2007, the Chicago Tribune concluded that the ACLJ has \"led the way\" in Christian legal advocacy.  In 2005, TIME Magazine named Sekulow one of the \"25 Most Influential Evangelicals\" in America and called the ACLJ \"a powerful counterweight\" to the ACLU.  Business Week said the ACLJ is \"the leading advocacy group for religious freedom.\"  Sekulow's work on the issue of judicial nominees - including possible vacancies at the Supreme Court - has received extensive news coverage including a front page story in The Wall Street Journal.  In addition, The National Law Journal has twice named Sekulow one of the \"100 Most Influential Lawyers\" in the United States (1994, 1997).  He is also among a distinguished group of attorneys known as \"The Public Sector 45\" named by The American Lawyer (January\/February 1997).  The magazine said the designation represents \"45 young lawyers outside the private sector whose vision and commitment are changing lives.\" Sekulow brings insight and education to listeners daily with his national call-in radio program, Jay Sekulow Live!, which is broadcast throughout the country on nearly 850 radio stations.  Sekulow also hosts a weekly television program, ACLJ This Week, which tackles the tough issues of the day and is broadcast on a number of networks nationwide including the Trinity Broadcasting Network and FamilyNet.  Sekulow is also a popular guest on nationally televised news programs on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, CNBC, and PBS.  He frequently contributes articles and commentary to national publications and is often quoted in the nation's leading newspapers including USA Today, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and Washington Times. A graduate of Mercer University, Sekulow graduated cum laude receiving both a bachelor's degree and doctor of jurisprudence from Mercer University where he served on the Mercer Law Review as an editorial staff member.  Following graduation, Sekulow served as a tax trial attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service.  In that capacity, Sekulow prepared and brought to trial tax cases on behalf of the United States Department of Treasury in United States Tax Court. He also received a Ph.D. from Regent University, with a dissertation on American Legal History, and is the author of numerous publications and law articles. Sekulow serves as a member of the Board of Trustees for The Supreme Court Historical Society in Washington, DC.","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/author\/jsekulow"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/163"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=93"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}