Thursday, December 29, 2005

6th Circuit rules against ACLU in Ten Commandments display case

Why am I unsurprised that the news of a ruling severely castigating the ACLU's arguments in a case they brought to require the removal of a Ten Commandments display failed to get much in the way of airtime? On 21 December the 6th Circuit Federal Appellate court ruled against the ACLU and specifically stating that the US Constitution does not require nor does it erect a wall of separation between church and state. The Louisville, KY Courier-Journal has the story:

::::::::A federal appeals court has upheld a display of the Ten Commandments alongside other historical documents in the Mercer County, Ky., courthouse.

The judge who wrote the opinion blasted the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the display, in language that echoed the type of criticism often directed at the organization.

Judge Richard Suhrheinrich's ruling said the ACLU brought "tiresome" arguments about the "wall of separation" between church and state, and it said the organization does not represent a "reasonable person."

The decision was issued by a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Cincinnati. It upheld a lower-court decision that allowed Mercer County to continue displaying the Ten Commandments along with the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the words to "The Star-Spangled Banner" and other documents.

All of the items were posted at the same time in 2001.
::::::::

You can read the ruling itself here. (PDF format.)

The second a court rules against such a display it's front-page news and live-action reporting interrupting all other programming. A court second only to the US Supreme Court rules the other way and... nothing. Go ahead and try yourself. I looked for the story on CNN, the Washington Post, New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, and even the BBC. Nothing. This news is over a week old and aside from the local papers carrying local stories this event got completely ignored in spite of being binding for all of Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and Michigan. That's a pretty big area to be so casually dismissed by our media watchdogs.

Could it be that the press just can't bring itself to report the bad news for its ally, the ACLU?

Hat Tip: Captain's Quarters

(Linked at Mudville Gazette)