Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

"Mojave symbol should stay, high court rules; Clarity in San Diego case elusive"

"Mojave symbol should stay, high court rules; Clarity in San Diego case elusive": Greg Moran has this article today in The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Today's edition of The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, California reports that "Mojave Desert cross can remain on public land, at least for now."

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that "Supreme Court allows Mojave war memorial cross; It narrowly rules that the 1st Amendment calls for a middle-ground 'policy of accommodation' toward religious displays on public land, not a total ban on symbols of faith."

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that "Supreme Court overturns objection to cross on public land."

Joan Biskupic of USA Today reports that "Ruling revives efforts for cross on public land."

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that "Court Says Cross Can Remain; Mojave Desert Icon Is Deemed More Veterans' Memorial Than Religious Symbol."

The Washington Times reports that "Mojave Cross can stay on display in California; Supreme Court defends public religious symbol."

Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal reports that "Divided High Court Lets Mojave Cross Memorial Stand." And online at the First Amendment Center, Mauro has an analysis headlined "Legal fight over Mojave cross continues."

On today's broadcast of NPR's "Morning Edition," Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled "Mojave Cross Ruling Shows A Supreme Court Shift." And on yesterday evening's broadcast of "All Things Considered," Totenberg had an audio segment entitled "Supreme Court: Cross Can Stay On Federal Land."

Full post as published by How Appealing on April 29, 2010 (boomark / email).