9th Circuit Court Rules War Memorial
Cross Unconstitutional

By Sam Kastensmidt

   In yet another act of judicial tyranny, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has sided with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in their efforts to remove God from all aspects of the public realm. This time, the court has ruled that a World War One memorial may not include the display of a cross.

On Monday, June 7, only one day after the 60th anniversary of WWII's D-Day, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous ruling prohibiting the display of an 8-foot-tall cross in the middle of the Mojave Desert. Seventy years earlier, a group of World War One veterans had placed the Cross atop a hill in the desert to memorialize their fallen brothers. Incredibly, the radical ideology of three activist judges has ignored the scope of these soldiers' sacrifice, instead, choosing to impose their radical godless ideology.    In the case of Buono v. Norton, the appeals court affirmed a lower court ruling, which initially forced park officials to drape a large tarp over the cross. The case, initially brought by the ACLU, was filed on behalf of one retired National Park Service employee who claimed to be offended by the war memorial. Though the cross rests atop a hill nearly 10 miles south of the nearest interstate, the man claimed to be "offended" by the cross.    In 2002, a federal judge in Riverside, California, sided with the ACLU, claiming that the "primary

effect of the presence of the cross" was to "advance religion." Gloating over their victory, Peter Eliasberg, an ACLU attorney stated, "We think this opinion makes it clear that the government has an obligation to take down the cross as soon as possible."

   On Monday, June 7, only one day after the 60th anniversary of WWII's D-Day, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous ruling prohibiting the display of an 8-foot-tall cross in the middle of the Mojave Desert. Seventy years earlier, a group of World War One veterans had placed the    Cross atop a hill in the desert to memorialize their fallen brothers. Incredibly, the radical ideology of three activist judges has ignored the scope of these soldiers' sacrifice, instead, choosing to impose their radical godless ideology.

   In the case of Buono v. Norton, the appeals court affirmed a lower court ruling, which initially forced park officials to drape a large tarp over the cross. The case, initially brought by the ACLU, was filed on behalf of one retired National Park Service employee who claimed to be offended by the war memorial. Though the cross rests atop a hill nearly 10 miles south of the nearest interstate, the man claimed to be "offended" by the cross.

   In 2002, a federal judge in Riverside, California, sided with the ACLU, claiming that the "primary effect of the presence of the cross" was to "advance religion." Gloating over their victory, Peter Eliasberg, an ACLU attorney stated, "We think this opinion makes it clear that the government has an obligation to take down the cross as soon as possible."

Court Ignored Government's Pleas

   Sixty years after the cross was constructed, Congress in 1994 declared the 1.6 million-acre area, which is covered with Joshua trees, a national preserve under the National Park Service's jurisdiction. The park service, however, defended the cross in court, saying the outcropping it rests on was being transferred to a local Veterans of Foreign Wars post in exchange for five acres of privately held land near the preserve, which is in San Bernardino County. The government told the court that the pending land transfer made the case moot. Incredibly, this information did not sway the radically skewed members of the appeals court. Judge Alex Kozinski ruled that even if the land was transferred, the cross may still be a government endorsement of religion.

   Congress has also declared the site a war memorial. Even though the cross served to memorialize fallen American soldiers, the court has requested that the Parks Department destroy or remove the cross.

Sam Kastensmidt is a regular reporter for D. James Kennedy’s organization Reclaiming America, which is where this article was located and reported on June 8, 2004. For more information about Reclaiming America visit their web site at www.reclaimingamerica.org.