House Passes Measure on Religion Suits (ACLU vs religious displays)

[joefree1]

House Passes Measure on Religion Suits

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; A04

The House passed a bill yesterday that would bar judges from awarding legal
fees to the American Civil Liberties Union and similar groups that sue
municipalities for violating the Constitution's ban on government
establishment of religion.

Though the bill would prevent plaintiffs from recovering legal costs in any
lawsuit based on the Establishment Clause, House Republicans said during a
floor debate that it was particularly aimed at organizations that force the
removal of Nativity scenes and Ten Commandments monuments from public
property.

"Liberal groups . . . scour the country looking to sue cities and states
with any kind of religious display, regardless of how popular these
displays are," said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-Fla.). Because judges often
require municipalities that lose such lawsuits to reimburse their
opponents' legal fees, "citizens' precious monuments are being eroded with
their own tax dollars," she added.

The bill, called the Public Expressions of Religion Protection Act, passed
244 to 173 on a mostly party-line vote.
more ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601486.html

Another step in the Christofascist march to Theocracy


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PaganWarrior/

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. Next on the agenda

Prohibit courts from even hearing cases that involve government sponsored monuments or displays, if the basis of the case is the perceived promotion of religion.

[liberal N proud]

2. Gonna $top that war on Chri$tma$

$ave that precious$ holiday from the jaw$ of the heathen

[MADem]

3. Now, doesn't that sound like it's ripe for overturning on its face?

So, you can sue for court costs in other cases, but when it involves just the Establishment Clause, you can't?

I can't see this lunacy standing. And I think this sums the whole brouhaha up concisely:

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU's Washington legislative office, said the measure is "election-year red meat for the Christian right, because they've been complaining they haven't gotten enough from this Congress."

Fredrickson added that it appears unlikely the Senate will pass the bill.

[joefree1]

4. Hope so

You made me feel a wee bit better. Thanks. :scared:

[MADem]

5. Most senators are lawyers, I'm thinking they wouldn't embarrass themselves

by voting for something that's completely contrary to the Constitution.