Advertisement

Cross Backers Win Political Round

Share
Times Staff Writers

Supporters of keeping the cross atop Mt. Soledad were buoyed Wednesday when the House of Representatives voted to transfer the city-owned land beneath the cross to the federal government.

A federal judge has ruled that the cross violates the constitutional separation of church and state and must be removed; the order was temporarily stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Backers insist that the 43-foot cross is a war memorial, not a religious symbol.

“Removing this landmark would send a message to our nation’s veterans that their service and sacrifice has gone unnoticed,” said Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine), sponsor of the bill, which passed 349 to 74.

Advertisement

The bill now goes to the Senate, where neither California senator has taken a position on it. Before the House vote, a White House spokesman said President Bush would sign the bill if it passed.

But James McElroy, the attorney for the veteran and atheist who has sued to have the cross removed, called the vote a waste of time and predicted that the federal courts, even if the land were transferred, still would order the cross removed.

San Diego voters last year endorsed by 76% to 24% a measure to have the land transferred to the federal government. The measure was voided by a Superior Court judge who said it was legally faulty. The issue is on appeal.

U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson in May ordered the city to remove the cross by Aug. 2 or face fines of $5,000 a day.

Then on July 7, Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy stayed that order until the city exhausts its appeals in state and federal court.

Kennedy also suggested that the high court might consider the issue, though it has twice refused to do so.

Advertisement

Among those voting against Hunter’s bill was Rep. Susan Davis (D-San Diego), who quoted a letter from a Jewish constituent whose father was wounded twice on D-day: “There are many things which could be erected as a tribute, but a cross, a crescent moon, a statue of Buddha or a Star of David are completely inappropriate and illegal.”

Cross supporters hope that transferring ownership of the land will boost their legal position because the separation of church and state is more strictly defined in the state Constitution than the U.S. Constitution, which would apply if the site were federal property.

But McElroy says there are 10 court decisions that have found it was improper to put crosses on federal property.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) said he would ask the Senate to consider the bill soon. The cross was erected in 1954 as a memorial to service personnel killed in the Korean War.

Simon reported from Washington and Perry from San Diego.

Advertisement