Ten Commandments lawsuit
headed to trial
Lawsuit challenges 8-foot granite display at Oklahoma
courthouse
The Associated Press
Updated: 4:54 p.m. ET April 29, 2006
STIGLER, Okla. - The 8-foot granite slab planted in the Haskell
County courthouse lawn makes the Ten Commandments easy to read and
hard to miss from the state highway that doubles as this towns
main thoroughfare.
The monument, erected with private money in 2004 with the countys
approval, doesnt stop traffic and courthouse visitors on a recent
morning barely gave it a glance.
I dont see anything wrong with it, said 73-year-old Launa
Medlock. Weve got to have religion, too.
Still, it has drawn national attention, and county officials have
been preparing to defend it in a trial that begins Monday in
federal court.
Religion in the air
Public support for the monument is strong in this town of 2,700,
sitting 90 miles southeast of Tulsa. Theres a church for roughly
every 125 men, women and children, and two signs advertising places
of worship flanking the courthouse lawn.
John Altstatt, a 42-year-old contractor who does business with the
county, said some people might see the marker as church pushed
down their throat. But he expressed ambivalence.
I dont have to look at if I dont want to, he said.
The lawsuit challenging the markers location comes amid national
debate over displays of Ten Commandments on public property. Court
challenges have yielded mixed results.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a pair of 5-4 rulings last year, allowed
the Ten Commandments to be displayed outside the Texas state
Capitol but not inside two Kentucky courthouses, where the justices
said they promoted a religious message. The court ruled religious
displays are not inherently unconstitutional and must be considered
on a case-by-case basis.
The non-jury trial, being held in Muskogee before U.S. District
Judge Ronald White, centers on an argument that the monument
violates constitutional protections against government endorsement
of religion.
Seeking removal of monument
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the complaint against the
Haskell County commissioners on behalf of James W. Green, a retired
veteran and longtime county resident.
All Mr. Green is asking is that the government not show favoritism
for a religious document which is in his mind contrary to the
greater message of Jesus teaching, said Micheal Salem, an
attorney representing Green. The lawsuit seeks no damages only
that the monument be declared unconstitutional and ordered removed
from public property.
A local lay pastor, Mike Bush, won permission from county
commissioners to erect the monument and raised funds with the help
of Haskell County churches and youth groups.
The commissioners say they granted Bushs request because of the
historical significance of the Ten Commandments and the Mayflower
Compact, which appears on the markers reverse side.
Because the county had allowed other monuments on the courthouse
lawn including tributes to war dead, two graduating classes and
Choctaw Indians who died on the Trail of Tears it could have been
sued had it denied Bushs request, said Joel Oster, an attorney
representing Haskell County in the suit.
This is a free speech case, Oster said. Theres just a lot of
stuff on this courthouse lawn. If the county commissioners had told
Mike no, it would have violated his rights.
Playing favorites?
In March, the county passed a resolution intended to codify what
had been previously described as a verbal policy involving
placement of monuments on county property. The written policy,
which the ACLU called a facade, included the criteria that the
monument be related to the history of Haskell County.
Salem said courts have ruled against monuments when their main
purpose has been found to be endorsement of religion.
There is no talk in Stigler of placing the five pillars of Islam
on the courthouse lawn, he said. There is no talk about selecting
some other religious doctrine to be venerated. Its very clear the
county government was playing to a popular notion.