Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
D.C.
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Mass.
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
N.Carolina
N.Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
S.Carolina
S.Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
W.Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming


Supreme Court justices warily confronted a free speech dispute Wednesday over a small religious group's efforts to place a monument in a public park.

The justices seemed reluctant to accept the arguments put forth by the religious group known as the Summum that once a government accepts any donations for display in a public park, it must accept them all.

"Do we have to put any president who wants to be on Mt. Rushmore?" Chief Justice John Roberts asked.

Yet the court also was uncomfortable with the position of Pleasant Grove City, Utah, which rejected the Summum's request to erect a monument similar to a Ten Commandments display that has stood in the city's Pioneer Park since 1971.

Justice David Souter wondered how the city could accept the Ten Commandments display and then say, "'We will not on identical terms take the Summum monument because we don't agree with the message.' Why isn't that a First Amendment violation?"

The Salt Lake City-based Summum wants to erect its "Seven Aphorisms of Summum" monument in the park.

The Summum argued, and a federal appeals court agreed, that Pleasant Grove can't allow some private donations in its public park and reject others.


Kelly Group P.C. - Business Litigation

Legal News | Breaking News | Elite Lawyers | Law Promo News | Terms & Conditions | Privacy | Contact

Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo

ⓒ 2009 Breaking Legal News Corp. All Rights Reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Breaking Legal News Corp.
as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or
a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.

America's Premier Lawyers | Insider Exclusive