Mount Soledad cross case back in court

The most recent legal skirmish in the 20-year battle over the constitutionality of the Mount Soledad Korean War Memorial cross began Wednesday in Pasadena as a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments from attorneys on both sides.

The case is an appeal of a federal court decision in San Diego that allowed the cross to remain on its La Jolla mountaintop memorial site. It’s not clear when they will rule.

Plaintiff’s attorney James McElroy, representing Jewish War Veterans who are challenging the cross’s constitutionality, said he felt opening day went well.

“The three judges are very experienced in separation of church and state issue,” he said. “They asked very intelligent questions.”

Asked whether he was optimistic about the outcome, McElroy said, “The law is pretty clear. Every 9th Circuit decision involving a Latin cross on permanent land has come out the same way: We expect to prevail.”

Cross advocate Charles LiMandri, an attorney for the conservative Christian nonprofit Thomas More Law Center, agreed the 9th Circuit has shown a preference against the cross remaining in place, but disagreed on the case’s final outcome.

“I’m not confident they (the appeals court) will get it right,” he said. “But I’m very confident the U.S. Supreme Court will.”

Though the U.S. Supreme Court declined once before to hear the Soledad cross case, LiMandri said the situation is different now.

“The U.S. Supreme court declined to hear the case years ago because it was involved with the state constitution,” he said. “It’s a different situation now. It’s on federal land.”

In 2006, the war memorial cross site was transferred by Congress from the city of San Diego to the federal Department of Defense. It is now under the auspices of Commander, Navy Region Southwest in San Diego.a

McElroy concurred that the circumstances of the case have changed over the years, but claims the core legal issues on which it’s being decided remain the same.

“The real question is, is that cross primarily a religious symbol, or is it primarily a veterans memorial?,” he asked. “Obviously, it’s primarily a Christian symbol. If it’s a Christian symbol, its unconstitutional for it to be on government property.”

Related posts:

  1. CA Supreme Court upholds Prop 8
  2. Toll road issue likely to end up in federal court
  3. Outgoing Padres owner to appear in court next week
  4. Superior Court to close on Wednesday
  5. American Red Cross announces critical blood supply need

Short URL:

Posted by on Dec 9, 2009. Filed under Archives. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

Leave a Reply



Bottom Buttons 1

Bottom Buttons 2

Bottom Buttons 3

Bottom Buttons 4

Bottom Buttons 5

Bottom Buttons 6





  • Community input received on proposed health club and pool facility in Rancho Santa Fe
    About 100 Rancho Santa Fe residents showed up on Friday, Oct. 17, for a health club and pool community meeting, the last outreach before ballots were mailed on Monday, Oct. 20. On the ballots, members are being asked whether the Rancho Santa Fe Association should spend $350,000 on a professional planning phase for the potential new community amenity. RSF Ass […]
  • Czech violin duo to perform at Village Church in Rancho Santa Fe
    In cooperation with the Consulate General of the Czech Republic, the Czech School San Diego hosts a free classical violin concert by internationally recognized Czech violin player Jaroslav Svecený and his daughter, Julie Svecená, who are on a tour of the United States. The concert will be at 7 p.m. Oct. 27 in the Village Church. The father-daughter duo will […]
  • Rancho Santa Fe weekly sports update
    Torrey Pines defeated Canyon Crest Academy 4-3 in a Palomar League opener for both teams on Oct. 9. Alayna Tomlinson and Farah Farjood each scored two goals to lead the Falcons. Samantha “Sammy” Cirino added one goal and one assist. […]