Judges won’t hear appeal on Commandments sign: County lost lawsuit over monument on courthouse lawn

From left, Haskell County District 2 Commissioner Sam Cole, District 1 Commissioner Kenny Short and District 3 Commissioner Henry Few are shown in 2005 by a Ten Commandments monument on the Haskell County Courthouse lawn. Photo By David Zizzo, The Oklahoman archive


DENVER — A hotly divided appeals court Thursday narrowly let stand last month’s decision against a Ten Commandments monument on the Haskell County Courthouse lawn.

Six of the 12 judges of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wanted to reconsider the June 8 decision of a three-judge panel of the court. Four of the judges said the decision conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The six judges were one short of the required majority to have all 12 judges of the court reconsider the earlier ruling.

The three-judge panel of the Denver-based court earlier concluded the primary effect of the 8-foot monument in Stigler is to endorse religion, thus violating the Constitution.

"The court’s decision in this case perpetuates a regrettable misapprehension: that recognition of the role of religion in this country’s founding, history, traditions and laws is to be strictly excluded from the civic sphere,” three judges said in one of two dissenting opinions that totaled 33 pages.

The six judges who voted not to reconsider the decision did not give reasons. Included was the court’s chief judge, Robert Henry of Oklahoma City.

http://photos.newsok.com/2/showimage/630128/gallery_photo



Circuit en banc order:
http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/06/06-7098.pdf

Panel Ruling (written by the three Republican appointees):
http://www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HaskellCountyOpinion.pdf

Though don't go thinking that the party of the nominating President is meaningless...



Nominating party analysis:

HENRY, BRISCOE, LUCERO, MURPHY, HARTZ and HOLMES denied rehearing en banc.

Henry, Robert Harlan - Nominated by William J. Clinton on February 9, 1994.
Briscoe, Mary Beck - Nominated by William J. Clinton on March 14, 1995.
Lucero, Carlos F. - Nominated by William J. Clinton on March 23, 1995.
Murphy, Michael R. - Nominated by William J. Clinton on July 25, 1995.
Hartz, Harris L. - Nominated by George W. Bush on September 4, 2001.
Holmes, Jerome A. - Nominated by George W. Bush on May 4, 2006.

TACHA, KELLY, O’BRIEN, McCONNELL, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH would grant rehearing en banc.

Tacha, Deanell Reece - Nominated by Ronald Reagan on October 31, 1985.
Kelly, Paul Joseph Jr. - Nominated by George H.W. Bush on November 19, 1991.
O`Brien, Terrence L. - Nominated by George W. Bush on September 4, 2001.
McConnell, Michael W. - Nominated by George W. Bush on September 4, 2001.
Tymkovich, Timothy M. - Nominated by George W. Bush on January 7, 2003.
Gorsuch, Neil M. - Nominated by George W. Bush on May 10, 2006.





"Whenever we remove a brick from the wall that was designed to separate religion and government, we increase the risk of religious strife and weaken the foundations of our democracy" ~Justice John Paul Stevens

Should "recognition of the role of religion in this country’s founding, history, traditions and laws (is to) be strictly excluded from the civic sphere?"

No one has a problem with "recognition."

that addresses "the role of religion."

I see a monument "to" religion.

a display in his office. What purpose is there to "recognize" the 10 commandments in a large statue publicaly displayed on the lawn of the Court House? Answer: Using the State to shove religion down the public's throat.

I have zero problem with public high school American history classes covering the role of religion in this country's founding, history, traditions and laws.. As long as it is as unbiased and honest assessment as is reasonably possible, including both the positive and the negative influences of religion in America.

But that is not what the people who wish to put religious monuments on public spaces wish and I think most of us know that.

United States" a textbook in our public schools is the day I'll believe that the role of religion is being properly explained.

Never gonna happen.

...it was not part of a display of the role of religion in the legal process. It's a "Hey, this is a CHRISTIAN courthouse, fuckers!!!!!" display.

Besides, only two of the commandments deal with secular law... the rest is religious. How to get into Heaven, which is not something I want the courts deciding!

... even if it only comes in monument form. What I really hate though is when such merging is done in bad faith (as I think it was done in this case). When the purpose of putting up a memorial is not to genuinely honor religion, but to politically gain from the uproar caused by the placing of such a monument or to simply anger people that disagree it is done in bad faith. The people that place these things will never admit to doing so but I would say that is the reasoning for about 95% of the 10 commandment monuments our there in the public sphere.

The people who placed this monument didn't even try to attempt to follow the court rulings on the subject.

That is the only thing those monuments are ever meant to express.

the dimwits should've looked up how to spell "adultery" before engraving it in stone.

THey outa crucify all of them if they like Jesus so much!!!!!

for just where the monument could be placed.

The next time you hear one of them talking about how the Ten Commandments should be in courthouses and schools, ask them if they have the Ten Commandments displayed in their church prominently. Very few churches do. But they do love to piss and moan about having those choice words of nomadic goat herders from 3300 years ago plastered in public places.

It's just one more example of the most hypocritical group in America whining because they can't have their way about everything.