A federal appeals court said it will not reconsider its previous decision to order the removal of roadside memorial crosses for fallen Utah Highway Patrol officers.
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, CO said Monday it will let stand an August ruling by a panel of three of its judges that the crosses violate the Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of religion.
The Utah Highway Patrol and the Utah Highway Patrol Association had asked the full court to reconsider the case in light of the August ruling, a typical step as part of the appellate process.
It is unclear whether the patrol association or the Utah Attorney General's office, which represented the highway patrol, will appeal the 10th Circuit's ruling to the Supreme Court, as neither returned e-mail messages seeking comment.
Lee Perry, a lieutenant in the highway patrol who along with another trooper came up with the idea for the cross memorials, told The Washington Times he would like to see an appeal.
"Hopefully our Supreme Court will take a look at this case," Lt. Perry said, adding that he hopes it "turns out favorable there."
American Atheists, a Texas-based organization, had asked the court to order the removal of the crosses on the grounds they violated the Constitution. The three-judge panel agreed, concluding that "the cross memorials would convey to a reasonable observer that the state of Utah is endorsing Christianity.
"Moreover, the fact that all of the fallen (Utah Highway Patrol) troopers are memorialized with a Christian symbol conveys the message that there is some connection between the [Utah Highway Patrol] and Christianity," the judges wrote in a 38-page ruling. "This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the [Utah Highway Patrol] -both in their hiring practices and, more generally, in the treatment that people may expect to receive on Utah's highways."
The three-judge panel said 14 crosses, which are 12 feet tall, were erected mainly on public land - on areas not meant as religious symbols, but as secular memorials.
The deceased officer's name and badge number are painted on the 6-foot crossbar in large black lettering. According to court records, the crosses bear the Utah Highway Patrol's symbol, the deceased trooper's picture and a plaque with biographical information.
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, CO said Monday it will let stand an August ruling by a panel of three of its judges that the crosses violate the Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of religion.
The Utah Highway Patrol and the Utah Highway Patrol Association had asked the full court to reconsider the case in light of the August ruling, a typical step as part of the appellate process.
It is unclear whether the patrol association or the Utah Attorney General's office, which represented the highway patrol, will appeal the 10th Circuit's ruling to the Supreme Court, as neither returned e-mail messages seeking comment.
Lee Perry, a lieutenant in the highway patrol who along with another trooper came up with the idea for the cross memorials, told The Washington Times he would like to see an appeal.
"Hopefully our Supreme Court will take a look at this case," Lt. Perry said, adding that he hopes it "turns out favorable there."
American Atheists, a Texas-based organization, had asked the court to order the removal of the crosses on the grounds they violated the Constitution. The three-judge panel agreed, concluding that "the cross memorials would convey to a reasonable observer that the state of Utah is endorsing Christianity.
"Moreover, the fact that all of the fallen (Utah Highway Patrol) troopers are memorialized with a Christian symbol conveys the message that there is some connection between the [Utah Highway Patrol] and Christianity," the judges wrote in a 38-page ruling. "This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the [Utah Highway Patrol] -both in their hiring practices and, more generally, in the treatment that people may expect to receive on Utah's highways."
The three-judge panel said 14 crosses, which are 12 feet tall, were erected mainly on public land - on areas not meant as religious symbols, but as secular memorials.
The deceased officer's name and badge number are painted on the 6-foot crossbar in large black lettering. According to court records, the crosses bear the Utah Highway Patrol's symbol, the deceased trooper's picture and a plaque with biographical information.
More from The Washington Times here.
11 comments:
Does this imply that all the crosses in Arlington Cemetery must be removed too? After all, they are on public land.
Personnaly I would like to see a few crosses that have been erected commorating the loss of a few American Aethists. Just another stupid example of the tail wagging the dog. Never will accept that a minority can make rules for the very vast majority. If I was a Utah Trooper and knew the names of some of these idiots, they best not call for me to respond to any of their crisis. Grrrrrrr jackkcharl@aol.com
I think Atheists are against the Constitution. I can not wait to see them try to explain to God, well it seemed like the right thing to do, our bad...
Why do we let 5% of the population tell 95% of the population what to do. NO ONE is for this, just a couple jerks.
Lawyers SUCK!
If they allow this for EVERYONE killed on the roadways, I say let them stay. If not, take them down. All lives are equal and should get the same level of respect. The troopers' lives are no more (or less) important than any others.
It would endorse Judaism also since that is the method of torture and murder the early Israelites used against those who questioned their religion.
That is the origin of the cross after all.
12:41 It was used by the Romans. Against many people including the Jews and this is how Jesus (a Jew) was killed.
9:28 -
The gravestones at Arlington National Cemetery aren't crosses. Maybe do a little research before making an ignorant statement.
@9:51 I am an Atheist, a Conservative, and fiercely support the brilliance of the Constitution. This is NOT about the minority trying to thwart the majority.. it is about what is Constitutional, and what is not. We must ask... what is the meaning and intent of the markers? If the answer is to promote any religion... not just one religion over another... then these markers are Unconstitutional. If there is no understood or implied respect for one religion or one over another... then these markers are completely O.K.
I don't think any crosses, flowers, teddy bears or anything else should be placed on side of roads.
I know they are they to remember a loved one who lost their life but they are eyesores and a distraction to drivers.
But by the same token, I'm not gonna whine and wring my hands if they remain there. They are important to someone just not me.
9:28: Ohhhh?
"Private Monument — Certain sections of the cemetery were designated in 1947 where private monuments could be placed. Private monuments that were placed in the cemetery were subject to review and approval prior to installation. As of April 1, 2001, gravesites in these older private-monument sections are no longer available"
Are you saying that NO crosses exist at Arlington?
I want to meet some of the "reasonable people" the court is talking about....do the Utah police make a practice of asking what your religion is when they stop you for speeding? And what "reasonable person" would be thinking of their upcoming job interview when they see a cross memorializing a dead person? I've seen a few of the crosses and NEVER thought the STATE was ENDORSING any religion. It took those judges 38 pages to try to convince us that their reasoning was correct. It only takes a paragraph or so to point out how hard they tried to reach to come up with a such a ruling.
Post a Comment