Showing posts with label Liberty Counsel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liberty Counsel. Show all posts

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Another blow to the ACLU

In another blow to the ACLU (not the kind the Kentucky ACLU chapter likes), the Washington Times recently published an article by Robert Knight about Liberty Counsel's most recent victory against the ACLU:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has lost its six-year campaign to tear down a Ten Commandments monument at the Dixie County, Florida, courthouse.

They’ve even lost their usual extortion money for harassing a community.

The case fell apart after the plaintiff, an anonymous North Carolina man who had planned to come to Dixie County to live in his RV, decided not to move there after all.

Senior U.S. District Judge Maurice M. Paul dismissed the case without prejudice on Feb. 13, because the plaintiff lacked standing. The ACLU could re-file if an actual resident is willing to buck the strong tide of sentiment in the county. For now, Mr. “Heel on Wheels” [not his actual nickname] has sunk the ship.

In February 2007, the ACLU filed a lawsuit naming “John Doe” as the plaintiff. Judge Paul ruled in 2011 that the monument was an establishment of religion, and awarded $130,000 in legal fees to the ACLU, which had tried to finger the taxpayers for $160,000. He then stayed his order, and was reversed by the 11th Circuit. When the plaintiff pulled out, it blew up the whole thing, including the ACLU’s award of legal fees.

Harry Mihet, an attorney at Liberty Counsel, which represented Dixie County, found the outcome pleasing: “We went from an order that ‘the monument goes and you have to pay $130,000 to the ACLU,’ to ‘the monument stays, and the ACLU has to pay a total of $3,600,’” Mr. Mihet told me.

For the 75-year-old “John Doe,” the dismissal’s bright spot is that he won’t have to leave North Carolina’s barbecue country for less certain barbecue conditions in Florida. He made the decision not to move upon learning that his identity would be revealed if the case proceeded. The initial ruling had triggered a pro-monument rally of 1,500 in nearby Cross City, whose population is 1,700, according to Ocala.com. So far, the ACLU has not insisted that Cross City change its name.

Mr. “Doe” apparently figured, according to the ACLU, that his new neighbors would welcome him not with their own version of home-cooked barbecue but with something a little stronger. No word on whether the good citizens of Dixie County will countersue for defamation, claiming that “John Doe” and the ACLU have slyly caricatured them as violent half-wits right out of the movie “Deliverance.”

“The ACLU got caught with its hands in the constitutional cookie jar,” Mr. Mihet said in a press release. “In getting kicked out of court, the ACLU has learned that it cannot impose its San Francisco values upon a small town in Florida, using a phantom member from North Carolina.”


Liberty Counsel argued that not only did the plaintiff lack standing but that “the case presents a Free Speech, not an Establishment Clause, issue. The Open Forum policy allows private citizens to erect private historical displays at their own expense.”

The five-foot-tall, 12,000-pound monument was erected at the top of the courthouse steps in 2006 after Joe H. Anderson Jr., chairman and founder of Lake City-based road builder Anderson Columbia, purchased it for $20,000.

Joe Anderson is another story. Not only has he funded several other Ten Commandments monuments in Florida, but also a “revival” mobile display. It’s parked somewhere until legal threats arise, and then it takes off down the road. “He’s having some fun with the ACLU,” Mr. Mihet said.

“We’re just getting started,” Mr. Anderson, 73, told me on Friday, saying that he had several requests from other counties to erect Ten Commandment monuments. “We got a bunch of them up right now, already built, ready to go.”

After the initial ruling, Mathew D. Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented:

“Dixie County is not establishing a religion by allowing a private individual to place a monument in a location where similar monuments may be placed. Dixie County should be applauded, not sued, for fostering open and robust speech in a public forum. Rather than take advantage of the forum, the ACLU prefers to censor speech with which it disagrees.”

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 in favor of a Ten Commandments monument alongside other historical items at the Texas state capitol, the ACLU has had a tougher time ripping God’s directives out of the ground. Oklahoma just installed a set of privately financed Ten Commandments on the state capitol grounds in November.

Hiram Saffer, director of litigation for Texas-based Liberty Institute, which will represent Oklahoma in any legal challenge, said the ACLU has not yet issued a challenge, but is actively trying to tear down crosses such as the one atop the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego. In that case, in which Liberty Institute is representing the Memorial Association, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to reverse a Ninth Circuit order to take down the cross. All parties are awaiting a “remedy” fashioned by the lower courts.

“The ACLU tried [and failed] to kick the Memorial Association out of the case,” Mr. Saffer said. “We suspect it was because they wanted to cut a deal with the Obama Administration.”

In King, N.C., Americans United for the Separation of Church and State is suing to have a veterans memorial remove a Christian flag and a statue of a soldier kneeling at the grave of a comrade. How do we know it’s a grave? Because of the cross. Liberty Institute is representing the American Legion.

While things get sorted out in the courts, wouldn’t it be interesting if Florida’s Mr. Anderson took his mobile Ten Commandment display on the road, up to North Carolina? He might run into “John Doe” and his RV.

Now, that would be a race to remember, and I wouldn’t bet against the Ten Commandments.

Robert Knight is Senior Fellow for the American Civil Rights Union and a columnist for The Washington Times.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/25/joe-doe-loses-his-fight-with-the10-commandments/#ixzz2Lx7wIhFD

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/25/joe-doe-loses-his-fight-with-the10-commandments/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

Monday, November 5, 2012

DOJ Agrees that High Court Should Reconsider Liberty’s ObamaCare Ruling

Tomorrow is the most important election of our lifetime with state and federal races.

"Those opposing us will get what they deserve" - Obama Advisor (source Mat Staver)

We now know precisely what is in store for biblical and values voters if Barack Obama wins another four years in the White House. Just hours from determining the direction of our nation, I still haven’t heard from all of our partners and I am concerned that you may have missed Valerie Jarrett’s chilling warning.

Jarrett is considered to be the Obama administration’s most powerful advisor and I don’t doubt she’ll do everything possible to enact her threat if given the chance. Please see my message below and prayerfully consider how, in this late hour, you can help Liberty Action PAC defeat this statist regime. Please read my urgent message from the weekend below – Mat.

We must not let Obama win another four years. The consequence would be disastrous. Thank you in advance for your outstanding support!

Mat Staver
Liberty Action PAC
http://libertycounsel.org

he U.S. Department of Justice has informed the Supreme Court that it does not oppose Liberty University’s Petition for Rehearing the Court’s denial of review of the case of Liberty University v. Geithner. Liberty Counsel, representing Liberty University and two private individuals, asked the Court to grant its Petition for review, vacate the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and remand (send back) the case for the Court of Appeals to consider the outstanding and unresolved claims, including the constitutionality of the employer mandate and the Free Exercise claim.

The Court of Appeals in the Liberty University case ruled 2-1 that the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) barred it from reaching the merits of the case, ruling that if the individual insurance mandate in ObamaCare is a tax, then the tax had to be paid before a court could entertain the suit. Liberty Counsel filed a petition with the Supreme Court, asking it to reverse the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court heard three days of oral argument on challenges to Obamacare, and the first day was dedicated to the issue raised in the Liberty University case. In June 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that the AIA does not apply to the individual insurance mandate, but did not reach the merits of Liberty University’s case. The Supreme Court then denied Liberty University’s request for review. Liberty Counsel then asked the Court to grant its petition, vacate the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and send it back to address the unresolved merits of the case, namely, the employer mandate and the Free Exercise claim based on ObamaCare’s forced funding of abortion. The DOJ filed its response late yesterday and agreed with Liberty Counsel’s request.

If the Court grants the request, now unopposed, then Liberty University v. Geithner will be the first case in the nation in which a federal court of appeals would consider challenges to the employer mandate and the Free Exercise of Religion claim. The case could then go back to the Supreme Court in 2013.

“I am very pleased that the Department of Justice agrees that the case should go back to the Court of Appeals to address the unresolved issues in ObamaCare. ObamaCare is the biggest funding of abortion in American history,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law. “ObamaCare will for the first time require employers and individuals to directly fund abortion. This abortion mandate collides with religious freedom and the rights of conscience,” Staver said.

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.





Sunday, June 17, 2012

If marriage loses, we all lose

The indispensible social pillar of marriage is being undermined and marginalized in our national discourse. I am concerned that some conservative leaders are backing down in their defense of marriage while making overt concessions to the pro-homosexual community.

Tragically, we are seeing a trend within conservative ranks de-emphasizing the importance of defending marriage from the attacks of pro-homosexual activists. And pro-marriage initiatives appear to be declining at the very time they are most desperately needed!

Some conservative leaders are either avoiding the issue or are actively diminishing the role of the marriage issue in 2012’s campaigns. There are even suggestions that natural marriage may not get much support at all in 2012’s conservative party platforms.

This retreat is totally unacceptable! If marriage loses, we all lose!

The Honorable Ken Blackwell, a Visiting Professor of Law at Liberty University School of Law and highly respected political commentator, recently said it this way:
“Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization.”

Respected conservative columnist Don Feder also weighed into this controversy:
“Surrender on gay marriage is surrender on marriage – which is surrender on the family and, ultimately, surrender on civilization. Unfortunately, many conservative intellectuals have lost sight of a crucial fact: American exceptionalism rests on three pillars – faith, family, and freedom. Remove any one, and the entire structure collapses.”

If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? The fact is, you and I and other enlightened pro-family citizens are going to have to be the ones who come forward to defend natural marriage in America!

I urge you to take a moment to sign our Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

We are calling on all of our friends and supporters to insist that President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (DOJ), congressional leaders, and military leaders actively comply with and defend the Defense of Marriage Act! This duly-passed act of the United States Congress is the law of the land and will remain so until that status is changed due to a holding by the U.S. Supreme Court!

Click here to sign Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act: http://www.lcaction.cc/656/petition.asp

As you know, we are also incensed that activist judges have ruled in favor of same-sex “marriage” at the expense of society’s greater good in several states where the clear majority of voters support marriage as being a union between one man and one woman.

This proposed law must also be defeated.

Liberty Counsel Action is on the front lines of marriage’s defense.

This battle for traditional marriage and family has enormous national significance and a split in conservative opinion on marriage only encourages the homosexual community’s quest for full national recognition of same-sex “marriage.”