Here are some posts from the ReligionClause blog:
I.
Supreme Court Grants Cert In Sunrise Rock Cross Case
The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari in Salazar (Interior Secretary) v. Buono (Docket No. 08-472, cert. granted 2/23/2009). (Order List.) In the case, a panel of the 9th Circuit found Establishment Clause problems with Congress' transfer of the Sunrise Rock Cross in the Mojave Preserve war memorial to the VFW. Five judges dissented from the 9th Circuit's denial of en banc review, writing a long opinion saying there that there was no evidence that the government would maintain or support the Sunrise Rock Cross after its transfer. (See prior posting.) The Justice Department has posted the government's petition for cert. which raises both questions of the lower court's ruling on standing as well as its application of Establishment Clause doctrines to the sale of real property as a way to rid the government of Establishment Clause problems. Here is respondent's brief in opposition (from SCOTUS blog), and the government's reply brief.
II.
9th Circuit: Transfer of Cross To VFW Did Not Cure Establishment Clause Violation
Congress' attempt to avoid Establishment Clause problems by transferring the Sunrise Rock Cross in the Mojave Preserve war memorial to the VFW has failed. In Buono v. Kempthorne, (9th Cir., Sept. 6, 2007), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals first rejected the government's contention that the case was not ripe. Moving to the merits, the court focused on the government's ongoing oversight and maintenance of the property, the government's reversionary interest in the property, the unusual method of authorizing the land exchange with the VFW and the government's continuing efforts to keep the cross on the property. The court concluded that the land transfer would violate the district court's earlier injunction against display of the cross on government property. It concluded: "carving out a tiny parcel of property in the midst of this vast Preserve—like a donut hole with the cross atop it—will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement." Reuters yesterday reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)
