October 6, 2008 

(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is preparing to deliver oral arguments on November 12, 2008 before the Supreme Court of the United States in a key First Amendment speech case that could affect local governments across the country.  In Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665), the ACLJ represents Pleasant Grove City, Utah in an appeal of a decision that would have forced cities to either to dismantle a host of monuments, memorials, and other displays, including long-standing patriotic and historical displays, or else let all comers install privately owned monuments or displays, regardless of content.

The issue began when a lawsuit was filed by a group called Summum, a self-described church founded in 1975 in Salt Lake City.  Summum sued Pleasant Grove City in federal court, claiming that because the city had erected in a city park a donated Ten Commandments monument, the First Amendment compelled the city to accept and display Summum’s proposed “Seven Aphorisms of Summum” monument as well.  A federal district court declined to order the city to erect the Summum monument, but the decision was reversed by a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit.  The ACLJ sought review by the full twelve federal appeals court judges of the Tenth Circuit, but the court split 6-6, leaving the panel decision in place.

“The Supreme Court is faced with what we believe is an easy choice:  preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech – or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to create havoc in cities and localities across America,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, who will present oral arguments to the high court on behalf of Pleasant Grove.  “We’re hopeful the high court will correct a troubling decision that ultimately would force local governments to remove long-standing and well established patriotic, religious and historical displays.”

The ACLJ’s opening brief is available here.

The ACLJ's reply brief is available here.

The ACLJ contends that the Tenth Circuit “made several crucial errors in constitutional analysis.” The First Amendment, the ACLJ explains, “does not require that a government park be turned into a cluttered junkyard of monuments contributed by all comers.”

“In short,” the ACLJ’s opening brief argues, “accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny.”

The ACLJ contends that the rationale of the appeals court’s decision “threatens to wreak havoc upon governments at every level in their ability to control the permanent physical occupation of government land.” The brief notes that “a host of federal, state, and local government bodies would be, under the Tenth Circuit’s logic, sitting targets for demands that they cede piece after piece of government land to forced occupation, by any group, with whatever monuments that group wishes to have installed, be it Summum’s Seven Aphorisms, PETA’s suffering circus elephant, or Rev. Fred Phelps’s denunciation of homosexual persons.”

The case has generated widespread interest from a variety of organizations.  Fifteen friend-of- the-court (“amicus”) briefs have been filed supporting the ACLJ’s position, including briefs from the United States government, fourteen states, nine cities (including New York City), veterans groups (including the American Legion and the VFW), and various religious liberty groups (including both Christian and Jewish organizations). Even strict separationist groups that typically oppose the ACLJ’s position in religion cases, like the American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and People for the American Way, filed briefs “in support of neither party” which basically agreed with the ACLJ on the First Amendment free speech questions at issue in this case.  Only two amicus briefs were filed in support of Summum.

Oral arguments in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665) are scheduled for November 12, 2008 and will be presented by ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow.

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C.