Joe Infranco, senior counsel of the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, criticized the ruling.
“It's tragic that the court chose a twisted and tired interpretation of the First Amendment over the common sense idea that the families of fallen American troops should be allowed to honor these heroes as they choose,” he said.
The legal battle over the cross began in 1989 when Vietnam veteran Philip Paulson, an atheist, sued the city of San Diego. He argued that the cross excludes veterans who aren’t Christian. A Jewish veterans’ group has also been a plaintiff in the case, as has the American Civil Liberties Union.
Both state and federal courts have ordered the cross removed. In 2005, San Diego residents overwhelmingly approved a measure to preserve the cross by donating the land on which it sits to the federal government.
While the land transfer eventually took place, the courts have ruled that this did not protect the cross from the constitutional dispute.
David Blair-Loy of the ACLU in San Diego County defended the decision.
“We honor those who have served, but the Constitution does not allow the government to exclude non-Christians by endorsing a clearly religious symbol,” he said, according to the Associated Press.
Jimmie L. Foster, national commander of the American Legion, called on Attorney General Eric Holder to appeal the “regrettable decision” to the Supreme Court.
“The sanctity of this cross is about the right to honor our nation's veterans in a manner which the overwhelming majority supports,” he commented in a Jan. 5 statement. “The American Legion strongly believes the public has a right to protect its memorials.”
Rev. John Fredericksen, a 56-year-old Christian pastor from Orlando, Fla., was a Jan 3. visitor to the Mount Soledad cross who was critical of the court ruling.
“For those who are offended, they can move or look somewhere else,” he told the AP. “Christians are not asking every mosque or synagogue to be torn down. Why tear down a symbol of Christianity? Let them find or make their own memorial.”
The court ruling rejected the notion that the cross was intended solely as a war memorial. It said that for most of its history the cross served as a site for annual Easter services. A plaque designating it as a war memorial was not added until the legal controversy began in the late 1980s.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
The cross was dedicated not only to fallen soldiers, but also to Jesus Christ with the hope that it would be “a symbol in this pleasant land of Thy great love and sacrifice for all mankind.” The ruling also described cross supporters’ “starkly religious message” and the religious characterizations of their campaign.
The court said that La Jolla has “a history of anti-Semitism that reinforces the Memorial’s sectarian effect.” It cited local housing discrimination against Jews until the late 1950s and testimony that local residents of the time believed without thinking that being religious meant being Christian.
Foster said the American Legion intends to file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of an appeal.
“Frankly, after having read the decision, I would say that it will take either the wisdom of King Solomon or the Supreme Court to resolve the issue,” he said.