Judge rules for ACLU in Jesus portrait case

Mayor says city will appeal ruling that calls for paying damages and fees

By Erik Sanzenbach
St. Tammany News
Published on Friday, April 18, 2008 9:39 AM CDT



U.S. District Court Judge Ivan Lemelle ruled Wednesday the original display of a picture of Jesus in the lobby of the Slidell City Court was unconstitutional, and he ordered the city to pay the American Civil Liberties Union $1 in damages plus “reasonable” attorney’s fees.

Thursday morning, Slidell Mayor said that after talking with City Court Judge Jim Lamz, the city would appeal the ruling.

“I respectfully disagree with the judge’s ruling, but it is my intent to appeal,” Morris said.

The year-long constitutional case of the separation of church and state has garnered national press attention, the wrath of Slidell Morris, rallies and a general outcry in the Slidell community.

In June 2007, the ACLU demanded the Slidell City Court remove a picture of Jesus that hangs in the court’s lobby. The ACLU said it was representing a citizen, known as John Doe in court documents, who was offended by the portrait. The ACLU claimed the Slidell City Court violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment that separates church and state. The ACLU further claimed the picture favored Christianity over other religions in a public building, and was thus unconstitutional.

Lamz said he would not remove the picture until he had gotten a legal opinion from a constitutional lawyer. Members of the Slidell City Council, and Morris, who was quoted as calling the ACLU “the American Taliban,” supported Lamz. There was a rally staged by residents on the courthouse steps that was organized by then state Rep. A.G. Crowe and members of the Slidell clergy.

The ACLU filed suit in July, and the city retained attorney Mike Johnson from the Alliance Defense Fund to represent Slidell.

The ADF specializes in cases of religious freedom and did not charge a fee to the city.

Just before the September 2007 trial in U.S. District Court, the City Court changed the display in the lobby. The new display contained pictures of Hammurabi, Confucius, Solon and other figures of historical jurisprudence alongside the picture of Jesus. The new display was an attempt by Slidell to defuse the situation. According to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, if a religious display is not a “stand-alone,” but is displayed with other legal historical figures, it cannot be deemed a religious display.

Lemelle agreed with the Supreme Court during the Sept. 6, 2007 trial. Though the new display was legal, Lemelle said Slidell would still have to pay damages because of the original display.

Wednesday’s Partial Summary Judgment by Lemelle repeats that the sole display of Jesus in the Slidell City Court was unconstitutional, but the new display was legal because it did not single out one religion over another.

But because of the unconstitutionality of the original display, Slidell must pay damages of $1 plus the ACLU’s attorney fees.

The ruling gives the ACLU 10 days to present its bill for reasonable fees to Lemelle.

“We are deeply disappointed in the ruling,” Johnson said Thursday morning.

Ann Barks, spokesperson for the Slidell City Court, said Lamz would not make a comment on the ruling.

“The case is still open, and the judge said he cannot comment until there is a conclusion,” Barks said.

But Morris had a lot to say about the ruling and the ACLU.

“The American Taliban strikes again,” Morris said. “They are truly an evil organization.”

He compared the ACLU to the Cultural Revolution in Red China during the Sixties, and alluded that the ACLU’s client was imaginary.

“We tried to talk to the man before the trial, but the ACLU would not let us,” Morris said. “As far as I’m concerned that person does not exist.”

As for the damages and attorneys’ fees, Morris doesn’t think it will add up to much.

“The ACLU doesn’t usually have attorney fees. I want to see bills, and the number of hours they worked,” Morris said. “I have nothing but total disdain for that organization.”

Johnson was also unabashed in his opinion of the ACLU.

“The ACLU is on a search and destroy mission against all things religious,” Johnson said. “It’s like they have nothing better to do.”

The Louisiana ACLU released a written statement posted on their Web site Wednesday afternoon. ACLU Executive Director Marjorie Esman said her organization regretted filing the lawsuit, but claim Slidell didn’t leave them a choice.

“We tried to work with the City of Slidell to have the display altered, and they refused to make any changes, despite our waiting weeks for them to take corrective action,” Esman said in the statement. “As a result, the taxpayers of Slidell will have to pay the price of the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees. All of this could and should have been avoided.”

As to Morris’ claims against the ACLU, Esman said that her organization was only defending the people’s constitutional rights.

“People called us un-American and the American Taliban, but all we were doing was supporting the American ideal that Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics —everyone should feel that our legal system is here to protect them. This is one of the most basic principles of the Constitution and of fundamental fairness,” Esman said.

Johnson said it may take awhile before a final settlement.

After the ACLU presents its case for attorney fees in 10 days, the city has another 10 days to present counter arguments. Then the city has to proceed with the appeal process.


Comments

21 comment(s)

    MJ wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:34 PM:

    " Hey Ben, How many city employees will lose their job so that you can pay the 65k in attorney fees and court cost?
    Karma is a very real thing people. "

    craig wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:47 PM:

    " If you look at the Bill of Rights it says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;". the courts expanded that provision and others to apply to the states in a decision that heralded federalism to the detriment of states rights under Article X. To say the law is settled is a misnomer. It is settled becuase it was ignored. "

    teresa wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:30 PM:

    " Someone wrote:

    "A great proof of that is that in 1782 Congress endorsed the first Bible in America written in English, the Aitkin Bible. God bless the ADF, J Cheeseman "

    What an incredible false witness. Congress didn't even exist in 1782.

    This country was founded on religious liberty, not religious bigotry.
    "

    MJ wrote on Apr 29, 2008 1:40 PM:

    " Well said Neb! Slidell has been doing what it wants to forever and it is about time that a higher power held them accoutable. Ben Morris has total disregard for people's rights. Do what is right and accept the judge's ruling. You are wasting a ridulous amount of tax payer's money on this stupid issue. If they would go this far to affend someone of a differnt religion with a picture, imagine how far they will go to make sure you don't get a fair trial. "

    Countrymama in Slidell wrote on Apr 29, 2008 11:40 AM:

    " I am down right sick of the overly noisy minority telling the rest of us how things are going to be!! I say kudos to Judge Lamz and Mayor Ben Morris for going to bat for our city. This country was founded on Biblical/Christian principle and thats the way it should continue to be. I've read that 87% of this country are Christians. Well time for the 13 % to sit down and shut up!!! Majority rules partner! The ACLU needs to get a life and quit picking on our town! "

    Elizabeth wrote on Apr 29, 2008 11:05 AM:

    " The law is very clear on this issue, and always was, but the city judge and the mayor got stubborn, wanted to play to the crowd, and decided to disobey the law. I think that they should PERSONALLY have to pay the damages and attorney's fees because they knew that they were wrong in the first place. "

    Samantha Morton wrote on Apr 26, 2008 6:07 PM:

    " The ACLU must have nothing better on their plate right now. Who are they to say who the portrait is indeed Jesus. Did they know the guy, no its all just an assumption of what they believe he looks like.
    Well thats about par for the course if this is all they can do is go to court and waste money on a photo. What is this world coming to. I feel sorry for this generation of kids growing up, they are going to get dealt alot worse things than this. "

    John wrote on Apr 23, 2008 7:38 PM:

    " The ACLU does not have a client. They are using an old tactic. You do know that the ACLU was founded by Roger Baldwin don't you? He was a socialist that wanted all religion gone and to be in control of everyone's money. It's working. Look at all they have accomplished since they legally brought Darwinism into our schools in 1925. The 1947 Ruling. I'm telling you they are out to destroy Christianity which is the basis for our form of government.Without religion and morality we are done as a nation. Time to fight people. "

    John wrote on Apr 23, 2008 7:34 PM:

    " Good people of La. I highly suggest you all get together and have this judge removed. He is violating your Constitutional rights. The ACLU is using precedent on the case they opened in 1947 Everson Vs. Board of Education "Seperation of Church and State". This decision unconstitutional as research will show. Running out of words I can use. Get rid of the judge. He's usurping the legislature ---voice of the people. Making you slaves to his decisions. This is a republic not a democracy. Read, "Original Intent" by David Barton. God bless. "

    R. C. .Moise wrote on Apr 23, 2008 4:29 PM:

    "
    I am amazed that the aclu has determined this picture is actually Jesus Christ. His apperance has been unknown since his time on earth. They must have found something no one else has been unable to determine for many years.

    Hum-mmmmmm. "

    Lise wrote on Apr 22, 2008 7:59 AM:

    " I for one would like to meet John Doe who started all of this. Don't we have the right to come face to face with the accuser? "

    ThePupil wrote on Apr 20, 2008 11:24 PM:

    " The mayor has run the city well. He continues to do so. I'm worried that the decision to appeal will cost Slidell more than it's worth. Honestly, wasn't it Jesus who said "whoever would sue thee at the law for thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." I'm sure it was. But then I bet Lamz never let someone off a sentence because, "well, who amongst us hasn't done something we shouldn't have." Morris calling the ACLU the American Taliban is about the best example of non-Christian behavior as one could find. "

    Kathy wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:06 AM:

    " The ACLU is, was, and always will be a communist orginization. I, for one am SICK and TIRED of them and the fact that our courts just fall all over themselves to appease this bunch.

    "

    Lewis wrote on Apr 20, 2008 8:00 AM:

    " I'm a Christian and belive everyone has their on beliefs to what is right and wrong. Then you get all these organations that only uses initals because they all stand for nothing that represents anything worth anything to belong too. So why can't everyone try to get along? But since this won't happen all of the real Christians need to stick together and march for our rights that we have (but get a permit) if we don't this will never end until we are the minority and forced out our belifes or jailed. So lets do something and Pray. "

    john cheeseman wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:47 AM:

    " Actually, according to the original intent of our Constitution this case with Slidell the judge should have thrown out as unconstitutional but he is not ruling according to the Constitution he is ruling according to his opinion of the Constitution which is obviously not very high. Point of fact is this country was built upon Christian principles. A great proof of that is that in 1782 Congress endorsed the first Bible in America written in English, the Aitkin Bible. God bless the ADF, J Cheeseman "

    John Cheeseman wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:41 AM:

    " The 14th Amendment speaks of freeing slaves born in the US making them citizens of the various States and of the United States. The judge took this to allow the fed gov to encroach upon the States giving Fed authority over State in all cases destroying State sovereignty. This was unconstitutional. They had no precedence to do it and the judge should have been fired. Since then it has been used as precidence in removing prayer from public arenas, i.e. schools, 10 Commandments and it goes on and on. "

    john Cheeseman wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:36 AM:

    " The Congress, whenever two thirds of both the Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or , on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a convention for proposing amendments. Example. '47 Ruling of "Seperation of Church and State". This phrase is not in our Constitution, our founding fathers were deeply religious men. The ACLU took our 1st Amendment and combined it with the 14th.
    A partial wording of the 14th which the judge chose to overlook "

    john cheeseman wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:31 AM:

    " Warren stated; The [Constitutional] Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society. Also Charles Evans Hughes (1862-1948) declared that: We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is. So basically we the people are nothing and whatever the judges decide goes. This is not the Constitution under which this county was founded. Article V of the Constitution establishes the proper means whereby the people may adjust, or "evolve" their government: "

    John Cheeseman wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:25 AM:

    " Slidell Dude makes a great point. The courts and the ACLU have officially recognized Jesus Christ, so they are without excuse when standing in judgement.
    Unfortunately there was a philosophy introduced in 1870 by then Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell applying Darwin's premise of evolution to jurisprudence. Under this case-law approach, history, precedent, and the views and beliefs of the Founders not only became irrelevant, they were even cousidered hindrances to the successful evolution of a society. This approach grew until it became powerful enough to make statements like that of Earl Warren (1891-1974) "

    Neb wrote on Apr 18, 2008 2:41 PM:

    " Ben -- you do realize it will actually cost MORE in attorney's fees to appeal this thing right? You are just digging a hole in an obviously losing fight. Mike Johnson and the ADF aren't giving you objective advice, because they have an agenda to advance. Its the St. Tammany taxpayers who you are continuing to get shafted because of your stubborn refusal to obey the law.

    And I'm not sure about your understanding of theocracy, but your position is a lot closer to Tabliban-thinking than the ACLU's... "

    Slidell Dude wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:29 AM:

    " First, I am a christian but do believe everyone has a right to their religious beliefs. Many don't believe in a higher authority. I thought our courts decided cases based on facts. Who, including the ACLU, can get on the witness stand and verify the picture is actually Jesus Christ. I personnly have not seen him and could not get up and tell a court that. This is a win for all Christians now that our Federal Government has officially recognized the picture is of Jesus Christ. He now officially exist so take that! "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The St. Tammany News is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in thesttammanynews.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the St. Tammany News. The St. Tammany News does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized St. Tammany News spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
Current Word Count: