Defending the Judeo-Christian Heritage, limited government, and the American Constitution
Saturday August 1st 2015

lincoln family bible study
Read along with us; share your insights, ask questions, post a link that adds to the discussion
S.E.M., Vol. 1, No. 7
Federalist 69 - by Alexander Hamilton. 1. What are the chief characters in regards to the President as outlined in the proposed Constitution? 2. Why does Hamilton believe the term of office for a President should be longer than three years? 3. What was the term of office for the king of England and what, in your opinion, is the potential for abuse in such a term? Would the term of office of the king of England present any advantages - in the Founders experience and in your opinion - over over the new American system? Read all of the questions and post your response at our new resource Self-Educated Man

ACLJ & 190K Americans to Court: Dismiss Atheist Suit Against Ground Zero Cross


The response has been overwhelming. We have heard from more than 190,000 Americans – including more than 150,000 online – who understand that a cross memorial at Ground Zero is a symbol of hope – a symbol that is a constitutional and appropriate exhibit at the National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York City.

Today we filed our amicus brief backing the Ground Zero cross and urging a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by American Atheists – legal arguments that are both offensive and absurd.

The cross, which was fashioned by two intersecting steel beams that survived the Twin Towers’ collapse on 9/11, provides hope and comfort for a nation that survived the tragic attacks of September 11th.

We’ve already told you about the flawed legal reasoning behind this lawsuit. In challenging the constitutionality of this display, the atheist group claims they are suffering both physical and emotional damages from the mere existence of the cross – physical and emotional pain that has resulted in headaches, indigestion, even mental pain.

Our amicus brief filed today is clear: we contend the decision to include the cross is a permissible exercise of free speech and does not represent a violation of the Establishment Clause.

The brief, posted here, contends: “Plaintiffs’ lawsuit represents a dangerous and unprecedented attempt to literally rewrite history and cleanse the record of a historically significant artifact. In the days and weeks following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the challenged World Trade Center Cross (the “Cross”) had a widely documented and positive effect on the First Responders at the Ground Zero site. It is entirely appropriate and lawful for the curators of a museum to acknowledge the Cross’s actual, historic role by placing it in the September 11 Memorial Museum.”

In urging the court to dismiss the suit, the ACLJ concludes that “a museum – public or private – has the academic freedom to display religiously-themed artifacts of historical or artistic significance.”

Our thanks to the more than 190,000 Americans who signed on to our Committee to Protect the Ground Zero Cross to stand with us in this critical brief.

We’re confident the court will reject the flawed arguments challenging this cross and determine that this memorial is not only constitutional, but an appropriate exhibit for the museum.

Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), one of the most prestigious law firms in the country. He is an accomplished Supreme Court advocate, renowned expert on religious liberty, and a respected broadcaster. Jay Sekulow is an attorney with a passion for protecting religious liberty – freedom – democracy.

Used with the permission of the American Center for Law and Justice.