High court hears dispute over religious monument
Headline News
Supreme Court justices warily confronted a free speech dispute Wednesday over a small religious group's efforts to place a monument in a public park.
The justices seemed reluctant to accept the arguments put forth by the religious group known as the Summum that once a government accepts any donations for display in a public park, it must accept them all.
"Do we have to put any president who wants to be on Mt. Rushmore?" Chief Justice John Roberts asked.
Yet the court also was uncomfortable with the position of Pleasant Grove City, Utah, which rejected the Summum's request to erect a monument similar to a Ten Commandments display that has stood in the city's Pioneer Park since 1971.
Justice David Souter wondered how the city could accept the Ten Commandments display and then say, "'We will not on identical terms take the Summum monument because we don't agree with the message.' Why isn't that a First Amendment violation?"
The Salt Lake City-based Summum wants to erect its "Seven Aphorisms of Summum" monument in the park.
The Summum argued, and a federal appeals court agreed, that Pleasant Grove can't allow some private donations in its public park and reject others.
Related listings
-
Rail agency sues contractor over LA collision
Headline News 10/31/2008The Southern California Regional Rail Authority has filed a lawsuit against a contractor stemming from the deadly collision of one of its Metrolink commuter trains and a freight train on Sept. 12.The contractor, Connex Railroad, provides the engineer...
-
Court denies appeal of judge's sentencing goof
Headline News 10/07/2008The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from an Alabama man who was sentenced to five years in prison when a judge wrongly thought the law required him to serve time.U.S. District Judge William Steele didn't want to order Patrick Lett, a ...
-
Lawsuits likely over NYC mayor's bid for 3rd term
Headline News 10/02/2008Mayor Michael Bloomberg is almost certain to face a legal challenge if he tries to alter the city's term-limits law and seek four more years in office.Several lawyers and government watchdog groups said Wednesday they are mulling legal action to bloc...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.